Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1.    #1  
    When is AT&T going to buy WebOS or the appropriate division of HP?

    Don't get me wrong, I like AT&T's model of own the train tracks and trying out different trains. They own wireless spectrum and own wired digital distribution as well.

    I always thought this combination would allow them to partner (or buy) a OS software platform to use across phones, PCs, set-top boxes, home automation, home security, tablets, appliances, gaming. I thought WebOS would be a good candidate because of multitasking and the emphasis on synergy across all platforms. Google is trying to do this, but they own software and not tracks. Microsoft has been at this forever and they don't own tracks either.

    Now that Verizon has a fiber network they can compete at this too, but I just don't see any of them pulling this together. There is too much focus on products and hardware and too little focus on integration and synergy.

    Eventually everything will talk with everything. Web protocols look like the first way this will be done. Let's get on with it already!!! I've been waiting since 1994.
  2. #2  
    I think it would be more like Apple buying AT&T and Palm buying Sprint. IMHO no carrier would want to be their own source of OS and handsets and expect to stay competitive. It's just not their core competency.
  3. #3  
    Because I am sure ATT has the ability and/or money to buy any of HP's divisions. (sarcasm)

    ATT should just stick to mainly providing the Network infrastructure, wired and wireless, and also some sevices; ATT wireless, ATT DSL, ATT UVERSE TV, and ATT home and business phone services.

    Leave the software of the devices up to the manufacturers. However allow ATT specific content and software to be downloaded on such devices.
    Last edited by Maestro1; 01/13/2011 at 06:57 PM.
  4.    #4  
    I don't think the carriers want to be in the OS business and creatively, I'm happy about that. However, each of the set top boxes has an OS or embedded system. The game consoles have them. The phone makers choose and OS and the home automation people have to choose as well.

    What was great about DOS and Windoze was standardization and coherence. Even when it sucked functionally, having the standard mattered. Now we're trying to tie together our entire digital worlds and there is no standard except HTML, Javascript and IP protocols. Either there will be a standard or someone will create a Synergy layer for everything to talk to one another and share data (including sensor readings, etc.). Because the carriers are the ones who loved closed systems, it would be great if they lead through purchase or partnership, the development of a standard.

    Google is doing it on their own right now. Google TV, Google Voice, Android and Chrome are their attempts to develop and standard that will start disjointed, but merge later. Each successful iteration feeds sales of the others. This is even moreso than the ipod led to iphone sales or MAC sales. That was primary seamless user experience and not data. Someone will make it both. Infrastructure companies like the carriers know this and I'd think they like to get in the game.
  5. #5  
    Having a Standard OS across many devices that are interconnected is the future, that is why i think HP is so into webos, so I do not think that they will ever give it up to ATT or anyone else. The way WEBOS was designed with having a profile, and connected to the cloud i believe is what made it so desirable to HP in their goal of having a standard OS across various devices.

    I think currently that Android has by accident ended up as being a standard OS across many devices. When google introduced android I am sure it was specificaly to be a smartphone OS; than as android's popularity grew it became an OS that is being put on everything, even if it is not designed for it.(example non honeycomb tablets).

    soon we started seeing android on tablets, net books, mp3 players; and maybe soon we will see it on in dashboards of cars, refrigerators, TV's, toasters, microwaves, printers, set top boxes.......and so on, until someone else comes out with a unique simple UI that can work with all these devices.( however specifically customized for each device accordingly)
  6. #6  
    HP is the biggest electronics dealer in the world. Why would HP give up such a thing?


    My Themes:CLICK HERE
  7.    #7  
    HP bought it so HP could sell it. I really don't care if they sell or not, I just want to get the end where all my stuff works together and I don't have to learn too many new interaction strategies (i.e. gestures) to get things accomplished.

    My concern is that HP may make a great WebOS set top box, but if Motorola is cheaper or has a deal with AT&T, the better product fails. Same with phones and other devices. Apple had to work with AT&T and give them an exclusivity deal in order to get some of the functionality and integration of iPhone. I want to see this across multiple markets. AT&T is barely configured so the phone people talk to the UVerse people, but it's getting better. Someone has to think big and have the connections to make it work. If HP thinks it's well positioned, we'll see. I think not. Their name is in Printers, PCs and Technical Instruments. That is absolutely NOT cool right now. WebOS is cool, but with nerds and productivity junkies. Somehow, they need a way to make it ubiquitous and cool. Maybe a new division with a different name. Don't let the PC guys anywhere near this thing.
  8. #8  
    HP has a lot of investment in Palm and they won't sell it.
  9.    #9  
    How many times has Palm changed hands over the years? I remember the little software company on El Camino Real in Los Altos before the US Robotics device. This company has been all over the place. HP needs Palm. I know that. Unfortunately need and synergistic aren't the same thing.

    As Apple, this may play out with HP being a fully integrated player (i.e. OS, device, ecosystem). That would be a shame. The Android model is much more viral. Control the experience through the software and get BROAD distribution. Carriers could seriously enhance distribution and frankly if you look at what's happened to Sony I'm not so worried about devices as I am ecosystems.

    I agree though, HP needs Palm and aren't likely to give unless something else gives them a lifeline to the future.
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by realistdreamer View Post
    HP bought it so HP could sell it. I really don't care if they sell or not, I just want to get the end where all my stuff works together and I don't have to learn too many new interaction strategies (i.e. gestures) to get things accomplished.
    That's not what HP says, and their history doesn't really bear that out. They tend to collect companies.
  11. #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by realistdreamer View Post
    HP bought it so HP could sell it. I really don't care if they sell or not, I just want to get the end where all my stuff works together and I don't have to learn too many new interaction strategies (i.e. gestures) to get things accomplished.
    Can you post the internal memo where you found this info? I would be willing to bet that this isn't a correct statememt... just sayin.
  12.    #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by hparsons View Post
    That's not what HP says, and their history doesn't really bear that out. They tend to collect companies.
    Reread my post and I needed a comma. "HP bought it, so HP could sell it." Wasn't saying that was there purpose, just that it was feasible if it made good business sense.
  13. #13  
    Ah, it should say "HP bought is, so they could ALSO sell it if they wanted to..."

    Of course, they won't be selling it in my life time.

Posting Permissions