webOS Nation Forums >  webOS Discussion >  webOS Discussion Lounge > OS market too full for webOS?
OS market too full for webOS?
  Reply
Like Tree63Likes

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01/07/2013, 06:47 PM   #61 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 1,623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Remy X View Post
Two words:

Firefox WebAPI


Later on, once the standards will have been developed, other major browsers like Google's Chrome will adopt it, perhaps even Opera, but not Internet Explorer or the iOS fork of WebKit
Saw your post after her's. I totally agree.

Sent from my MB855 using Tapatalk 2
k4ever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/07/2013, 10:08 PM   #62 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 1,623
Here is a study on the matter:

http://venturebeat.com/2013/01/07/66...id-or-windows/

Seems 75% of current smartphone and tablet owners don't care which OS they run. A quarter of them would switch for more features...

---Sent from my HP TouchPad using Communities (a great webOS app!)
k4ever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/07/2013, 11:28 PM   #63 (permalink)
Banned
 
Posts: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by fxspec06 View Post
There is so much win in this post Charlee Sheen would be ashamed
The best part is when he fell for it; I was largely just giving k4ever a hard time there since I'm just fine with a good app taking the place of having to browse the actual site if it means I'm getting a properly optimized and feature-filled experience for the form factor. (Hello, Twitter and Facebook clients.)

In any case, I can't speak for Netflix and their desktop strategy; they know what they're doing, so who the hell knows what they'll do after Silverlight goes dark. Keep in mind that DRM on a PC/Mac is easier to circumvent due to easy access to the filesystem versus mobile and set-top (Wii, GoogleTV, etc). That's why Silverlight's been their go-to technology so far. Chances are, they've already got something in the pipeline.
dignitary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/07/2013, 11:31 PM   #64 (permalink)
Banned
 
Posts: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by k4ever View Post
Here is a study on the matter:

66% of phone, tablet owners don’t really care if they run iOS, Android, or Windows | VentureBeat

Seems 75% of current smartphone and tablet owners don't care which OS they run. A quarter of them would switch for more features...

---Sent from my HP TouchPad using Communities (a great webOS app!)
But when push comes to shove, do they make a switch? How many of those surveyed already have? That's the real question they should be working to answer instead of posing hypotheticals. Anyone can say, "Theoretically speaking, I would play the field" when in reality most people, when it comes time to upgrade, tend to stick with what they're already familiar with unless the OS has been far eclipsed in terms of support (or worse, it's dying).

It's like those awesome political polls every 4 years indicating, "It's gonna be a breakout year for third-parties in American politics, and we have a poll with over two-thirds of the electorate saying they would definitely consider a third party!" Only, when the vote is cast, they get about 0.5% of the popular vote. Hmm, odd, right? One might actually consider the idea that psychologically an action is much easier said and considered than...actually done. No matter how attractive the proposition is. Why? Because they often can't consider the downstream implications of that drastic change at the very moment someone's asking the question, so they go with their impulse answer from the gut rather than answer based on an actual self-assessment.

To that end, fans of Windows Phone could also hold up the exact same survey you posted and scream bloody murder running around in circles wondering why they haven't been drowning in new users for the past year. (Or, heaven forbid, Blackberry.) When users look to other platforms, they might want to try out a new user experience, but not at the expense of having to leave major apps behind that they've grown to develop a long history of using; very, very few people like having to start over from scratch. In the Android space, that generally means moving from one manufacturer's aesthetic to another (i.e., HTC Sense to, say, Samsung's)--or off to iOS where they'll more often than not find the same apps over there provided they're popular enough.

I rarely trust these types of surveys because they're subject to dramatic change on an individual basis. Ask the same people a month from now the same questions and compare the answers. But, hey, Accenture's making great bait for industry rags, smartphone platform zealots, and marketing geniuses who can't--or don't want to--see the forest for the trees. Objective and proven hard facts speak a lot louder than this, but they aren't quite as easy to obtain.

Last edited by dignitary; 01/07/2013 at 11:43 PM.
dignitary is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked By: Remy X
Old 01/08/2013, 07:27 AM   #65 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattmers View Post
BB 10
Open webOS
Sailfish OS
Tizen OS (forgotten in the original list)
and now Ubuntu mobile os
What do these have in common?
AFAIK all of them support QT - an interesting question is how much effort it takes to make an app running on all of these operating systems? There could evolve some sort of platform independence and maybe a common app store - just an idea, I don't think this will happen.
__________________
Pre≥ (iPhone 4), TouchPad 32 GB (PlayBook 16 GB)
T-Pad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/08/2013, 08:32 AM   #66 (permalink)
Member
 
geekpeter's Avatar
 
Posts: 3,686
Quote:
Originally Posted by dignitary View Post
The best part is when he fell for it; I was largely just giving k4ever a hard time there since I'm just fine with a good app taking the place of having to browse the actual site if it means I'm getting a properly optimized and feature-filled experience for the form factor. (Hello, Twitter and Facebook clients.)

In any case, I can't speak for Netflix and their desktop strategy; they know what they're doing, so who the hell knows what they'll do after Silverlight goes dark. Keep in mind that DRM on a PC/Mac is easier to circumvent due to easy access to the filesystem versus mobile and set-top (Wii, GoogleTV, etc). That's why Silverlight's been their go-to technology so far. Chances are, they've already got something in the pipeline.
well, their strategy for netflix for windows only (coz the netflix ceo is on the microsoft board of directors) has already been shattered, theres been a netflix for ubuntu (via a custom wine that actually works with their silverlight - wine-compholio) for a month or more now, shame its x86 only ofc.
__________________
Touchpad Keyboard Themes - >> Click Me <<
geekpeter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/08/2013, 10:04 AM   #67 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 1,623
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Pad View Post
What do these have in common?
AFAIK all of them support QT - an interesting question is how much effort it takes to make an app running on all of these operating systems? There could evolve some sort of platform independence and maybe a common app store - just an idea, I don't think this will happen.
Three of the four, including Android, are mobile Linux operating systems. They should be able to share more than just apps.

Sent from my MB855 using Tapatalk 2
k4ever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/08/2013, 10:12 AM   #68 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 1,623
Quote:
Originally Posted by dignitary View Post
The best part is when he fell for it; I was largely just giving k4ever a hard time there since I'm just fine with a good app taking the place of having to browse the actual site if it means I'm getting a properly optimized and feature-filled experience for the form factor. (Hello, Twitter and Facebook clients.)

In any case, I can't speak for Netflix and their desktop strategy; they know what they're doing, so who the hell knows what they'll do after Silverlight goes dark. Keep in mind that DRM on a PC/Mac is easier to circumvent due to easy access to the filesystem versus mobile and set-top (Wii, GoogleTV, etc). That's why Silverlight's been their go-to technology so far. Chances are, they've already got something in the pipeline.
I'm not down with restricting a platform from having a capability simply because it is not on a list of platforms you want to exploit. I also truly believe in the openess of the web and its services. If an app is not available for a platform then allow the website to work. More precisely the website should work whether there is an app available or not.

Sent from my MB855 using Tapatalk 2
k4ever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/08/2013, 11:42 AM   #69 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 62
Agree completely. I'm glad there are choices.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rnp View Post

... and I continue using my Pre≥ as default. Simple & practical.

... need devices, need spread in all world... because the webOS is good enough to market.
getsun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/08/2013, 12:58 PM   #70 (permalink)
Member
 
xandros9's Avatar
 
Posts: 911
What would be really nice was if apps were portable from platform to platform, ecosystem to ecosystem, but that will never happen, so i think thats a problem

sigh
__________________
HP Think Beyond Event - http://youtu.be/VnjwG7Z8AM8
m505 > Z|71 > T|C > Z|71 > T|T3 > LifeDrive > iPod touch 4
> Pre 2 > Treo Pro > Aria > HD2 > Treo 650 > Lumia 920
My OneDrive referral link: OneDrive
xandros9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/08/2013, 01:10 PM   #71 (permalink)
Member
 
Grabber5.0's Avatar
 
Posts: 3,873
Yeah, as nice as that would be for consumers, closed app markets will not allow that to happen. Perhaps among open markets for the open OSes that could happen.
__________________
Matt Williams
*How to install .patch files on your device*
Developer of: SMS Auto Forward/Reply, GPS Viewer,
Keyring converters for CSV, eWallet, & CodeWallet
Touchpad patches:Keyring HD,ClassicNote HD, YouTube HD (for 2.1 app), Show email recipient addresses for contacts
Phone patches: Forums fixes and enhancements patch, Weather Channel fix
All-device patches: Update GlobalSign certs, Google Sync https fix, Yahoo contact sync fix

Grabber5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/08/2013, 07:47 PM   #72 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 755
Quote:
Originally Posted by xandros9 View Post
What would be really nice was if apps were portable from platform to platform, ecosystem to ecosystem, but that will never happen, so i think thats a problem

sigh
Don't most app designers make apps for the platforms that are being used by a large base?
rnld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/08/2013, 07:52 PM   #73 (permalink)
Member
 
geekpeter's Avatar
 
Posts: 3,686
Quote:
Originally Posted by xandros9 View Post
What would be really nice was if apps were portable from platform to platform, ecosystem to ecosystem, but that will never happen, so i think thats a problem

sigh
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnld View Post
Don't most app designers make apps for the platforms that are being used by a large base?
think he means getting an app on say an iphone and then moving to an android phone and reaquiring the same app purchashed on the other device/os?

which tbh is what html5 apps shouldnt be far off in theory, still wouldnt happen tho, companies want more ££/$$ so they want us ofc to buy the same thing on different devices/os's, unfortunatly cant see it happening anytime soon.
__________________
Touchpad Keyboard Themes - >> Click Me <<
geekpeter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/09/2013, 12:46 AM   #74 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 288
To be honest developers in general develop apps as an occupation. It puts food on the table. So how would allowing the app to be portable from one platform to another be of value to them? I honestly cannot think of one. And no developer would want to be responsible for porting the user ID/ database, historical infromation for the user. What if data was lost? the developer would not want to take up the responsibility just for a couple of dollars.

Back to the issue of whether OpenOS can survive in this mobile OS crowd. As of right now in the current state : which is --- a. No hardware. b. OpenOS is still inferior even to WebOS v3. c. No support from HP. d. No clear end-direction. e. dying ecosystem. f. dying and inferior devices.

My prognosis : 5% chance of OpenOS in the current state to survive past 1 year / grow in prominence. OpenOS is not like some Linux variant which I can run on a intel /pc hardware. The hardware design is quite closed, the drivers are closed and complicated and unless gram or HP makes available an optimised hardware reference to OEMS to design their own - it's getting close to endgame for webos as much as I like the interface and the whole user experience.
daexpression is offline   Reply With Quote
Liked by dignitary likes this.
Thanked By: dignitary
Old 01/09/2013, 02:46 AM   #75 (permalink)
Homebrew Developer

 
Posts: 2,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by daexpression View Post
To be honest developers in general develop apps as an occupation. It puts food on the table. So how would allowing the app to be portable from one platform to another be of value to them? I honestly cannot think of one. And no developer would want to be responsible for porting the user ID/ database, historical infromation for the user. What if data was lost? the developer would not want to take up the responsibility just for a couple of dollars.

Back to the issue of whether OpenOS can survive in this mobile OS crowd. As of right now in the current state : which is --- a. No hardware. b. OpenOS is still inferior even to WebOS v3. c. No support from HP. d. No clear end-direction. e. dying ecosystem. f. dying and inferior devices.

My prognosis : 5% chance of OpenOS in the current state to survive past 1 year / grow in prominence. OpenOS is not like some Linux variant which I can run on a intel /pc hardware. The hardware design is quite closed, the drivers are closed and complicated and unless gram or HP makes available an optimised hardware reference to OEMS to design their own - it's getting close to endgame for webos as much as I like the interface and the whole user experience.
Sorry you're a bit wrong here.

a. There is hardware, even though not specifically designed for Open webOS, it can run it. See the various ports coming already (Nexus, Nexus 7 etc).

b. Yes correct.

c. HP/Gram are still continuously updating Open webOS to add new features etc.

d. Yes correct.

e. Yes correct.

f. Yes, however Veer, Pre3 and Touchpad are quite good compared to earlier devices, but they do get old.

You CAN run Open webOS on your PC, no problem! Drivers being closed is not HP's fault, it's the fault of the chipset/device manufacturers. The ones that are open can run Open webOS without too much hassle.
Herrie is online now   Reply With Quote
Liked by Remy X likes this.
Old 01/09/2013, 10:11 AM   #76 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Herrie View Post
Sorry you're a bit wrong here.

a. There is hardware, even though not specifically designed for Open webOS, it can run it. See the various ports coming already (Nexus, Nexus 7 etc).

b. Yes correct.

c. HP/Gram are still continuously updating Open webOS to add new features etc.

d. Yes correct.

e. Yes correct.

f. Yes, however Veer, Pre3 and Touchpad are quite good compared to earlier devices, but they do get old.

You CAN run Open webOS on your PC, no problem! Drivers being closed is not HP's fault, it's the fault of the chipset/device manufacturers. The ones that are open can run Open webOS without too much hassle.
a. As much as there are ports coming Nexus and Nexus 7..simply said it's still primarily for hackers/ geeks. It's not a mass release product. And the problem lies with HP/ Gram, expecting volunteers to get a working port and probably not putting their effort into it.

c. Point C. As much as they're continuously upgrading webos with new features...these are features primarily to get it up to capability to webos 3.0. Will it be on part with say Android 4.x? - I can safely say no. However I do think Openos has the cleanest and best UI even compared to 4.x android.

On the issue of drivers. There are Linux drivers (available from android). The fact is back to the issue of low level driver programming capabilities. I do not expect these to be available readily - but at least HP/Gram should have these people in the team to help say the OpenOS ports team to improve the drivers etc? No?

The mobile market is moving so fast...and in this current sprint - webos is far behind all the existing mobile OS with a Ubuntu nipping it's heels.

Solutions that I can see.
1. HP to release reference mobile devices for OEM to copy.
2. Gram to state clearly their upcoming programs/ efforts and timelines
3. At least the professional edition of Open OS to be ready to be ported into a standard device.
(all these must happen within the next six - 9 months.)
daexpression is offline   Reply With Quote
Liked by dignitary likes this.
Thanked By: dignitary
Old 01/09/2013, 10:58 AM   #77 (permalink)
Homebrew Developer

 
Posts: 2,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by daexpression View Post
a. As much as there are ports coming Nexus and Nexus 7..simply said it's still primarily for hackers/ geeks. It's not a mass release product. And the problem lies with HP/ Gram, expecting volunteers to get a working port and probably not putting their effort into it.

c. Point C. As much as they're continuously upgrading webos with new features...these are features primarily to get it up to capability to webos 3.0. Will it be on part with say Android 4.x? - I can safely say no. However I do think Openos has the cleanest and best UI even compared to 4.x android.

On the issue of drivers. There are Linux drivers (available from android). The fact is back to the issue of low level driver programming capabilities. I do not expect these to be available readily - but at least HP/Gram should have these people in the team to help say the OpenOS ports team to improve the drivers etc? No?

The mobile market is moving so fast...and in this current sprint - webos is far behind all the existing mobile OS with a Ubuntu nipping it's heels.

Solutions that I can see.
1. HP to release reference mobile devices for OEM to copy.
2. Gram to state clearly their upcoming programs/ efforts and timelines
3. At least the professional edition of Open OS to be ready to be ported into a standard device.
(all these must happen within the next six - 9 months.)
I think you shouldn't forget is that HP committed to a very challenging timeline to get Open webOS out to the market.

They DID delivered pretty much every every milestone on track which was very challenging due to the number of people leaving the various teams and finding replacements for those.

Is 1.0 perfect? No it isn't, it was merely stripped down 3.0.x with a lots of updated and standardized stuff in order for it to be a solid foundation for future. Are there bugs or things that need fixing: Yes for sure. A lot of things were done in a "hackish" way in the past due to QT/WebKit limitations that now can be addressed properly with newer QT and WebKit.

These kinds of hacks are all around the code that need replacing. How do you find them? By putting it on an actual device like the Ports guys did. HP/Gram has been very supportive in any questions and in addressing any issues raised by Ports and also by people on the Open webOS mailing list.

A lot of issues have been sorted already and the planned upgrade to QT5/Webkit2 will give a very solid foundation for any future improvements. It's important to have a solid and proper working base before digging into details.

Ports has been very actively working on getting this ported to an initial device to get the bugs out. All the work that has been done is re-usable for pretty much any future port. I guess you can compare it to Cyanogenmod in a certain way, though a lot smaller still.

The biggest problem is actually Android, because their kernel version is far behind still and therefore the drivers too since they're only supplied in binary blobs and no proper open source drivers for chipsets. Theoretically you could run Open webOS on 2.6.x or 3.0.x kernels, but it's not recommended.

Some manufacturers have been a lot more open (Texas Instruments, Intel) and some not (Qualcomm, Nvidia, MediaTek). Once the driver issues are resolved (or Android finally updates to a more recent (proper) kernel, we can see ports to a lot more devices).

I agree that Gram/HP can be more open about timelines, but I think resources are their biggest problem currently. Their team still has quite some vacancies, so I can understand that they don't want to make hard commitments they cannot make.

QT5/WebKit2 was due in December but wasn't delivered yet, but should be sometime this month. Also the new GStreamer/Media bits are due to be released this month (at least beta). This should already enhance the capabilities of Open webOS a lot more so we can have proper Photo/Video/Audio capabilities.

Apps are still an issue, but that is something of a secondary worry to be honest. First the basis needs to be solid and good.

Anyone is free of course to contribute wherever they can to speed up the efforts, fix bugs, write apps etc
Herrie is online now   Reply With Quote
Liked by ewl88 and brandongoeszoom like this.
Old 01/09/2013, 07:59 PM   #78 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by k4ever View Post
Ok. There were idiots here who complained about not having an app for websites that worked well in the TouchPad's browser. I can understanding wanting an app for something that didn't work at all, like Netflix, even though I would have just liked a Silverlight plugin for the browser. However, if the website worked well, why require an app? The goal of a tablet is to eventually replace a laptop and laptops don't require apps for website content.

Until HP decided not to continue updating/fixing issues with it, the TouchPad's browser was good. It defaulted to full desktop view instead of mobile view unlike almost all of Android's browsers. It had plugins like Flash to view the whole web unlike the original iPad's browser. I remember shortly after buying my TouchPad watching a friend try to read the news from a site (forget which one) that was not "¬€¬Ěoptimized" for the iPad. It wasn't pretty. I was able to view the site just like it looked on the desktop.

Apple created the stupid app count phenomenon. When the iPhone was first introduced it was going up against some heavy weights like Windows Mobile 6 and Blackberry OS. Each of them had thousands of games and useful programs that a lot of folks didn't even know about. Most of those programs were for productivity. Apple also made the decision not to include Flash and a few other plugins in their mobile browser at a time when people were getting tired of the WAP browsers and looking for something similar to the desktop experience.

Apple had a multiple problems. One way to solve them was to concentrate their focus on apps that people needed. Another way was to build apps to replace the functionality on their crippled web browser. They launched a masterful advertising campaign assuring people that "there is an app for that". It really meant don't worry about lost functionality, we have an app to fix that. Instead people joking associated it to mean that no matter what your absurd need was, there was an app for that and other people took it literally. Apple also began counting each app that they had and telling the public to assure them that the iPhone had some apps. Problem was the public and wannabe tech reviewers didn't notice that Apple was also counting web site replacements as apps.

The iPhone was popular when its app count was closer to zero. People stood in line for the features on the phones, not the apps. News organizations and other organizations who had web sites that didn't work on the iPhone quickly made apps that did and advertised them to the point that it became fashionable. Even sites that worked perfectly well started to get in on the game making apps with useless features that are 1/2 of what the actual websites offer. Then those wannabe tech reviewers starting using the app count as a way to justify/not justify buying a phone.

We all played right into Apple's game. Now the tides have turned in the worst way as the media industry, who doesn't give a damn about its customers and only cares about maximizing profits, have figured out how to use these apps or lack of these apps to extract more money out of us. They are actually blocking their websites from use with mobile browsers and funneling customers to their apps. They are using the popularity of their services as leverage. Pretty soon the web as we used to know it won't exist anymore and the idiots who cried for an app icon to replace a simple website instead of requiring the OS to have a decent standard compliant browser only have themselves to blame.

I seriously hope that whatever set of OSes that survive in the coming years don't give in to the attempts to subvert our freedoms on the Internet just to have a crappy app.

/end of rather long winded rant...

--Sent from my HP TouchPad using Communities (a great webOS app!)
Well said. I knew apple was a master of marketing and your points proved it. Hide your weaknesses by hype- a pure diversionary tactic.
I always felt that a great browser will make most of us intermediate level users (and above) happy. I look at iOS apps and most are meh. Full web browser version is vastly superior.
The hardware issue is potentially fixable- If there is a demand for webOS then the OEM can just run it on a current device. Just divert a fraction of those devices and load openWebOS. But how do you create demand for this? And is the OEM willing to anger Google? That's why if openWebOS starts up it will probably in a smaller market where carriers aren't so powerful and push Android or iOS over everything else.
ewl88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/10/2013, 03:55 AM   #79 (permalink)
Member
 
Buddy1969's Avatar
 
Posts: 536
Quote:
Originally Posted by ewl88 View Post
... But how do you create demand for this? ...
That question hits the sweet spot.

HP showed how NOT to do it:
Buy some smartphoneOS.
Put a tablet out that noone knows for the price of an iPad.
Be confused why it doesn't sell.
Stop the whole thing altogether.

Apple showed how to do it:
Take your time to create something that has has at least one unique selling point. (wood)
Warm up the marketing machine with a lot of cash to tell people all about the product and it's uniqueness (spark)
Hype follows (fire)
Kindle the hype initially by not having enough devices for sale.
The hype draws in the developers (oxygen) to produce massive amounts of apps which in turn create a lot of revenue (heat).
Reach ROI. (have a nice BBQ)

No matter if you like Apple or not, that's not the point. But they did it right, at least from their perspective and from a marketshare perspective (which is mostly the same).

For me it's not so much an issue of "is there space" ...
WinMobile, PalmOS and Blackberry were the smartphone-topdogs, in the time before iOS and Android.
iOS and Android MADE their space, by telling the people (rightfully or not - judge yourself) that the have "the thing you want/must have". They adressed a different group of customers.
While M$, Palm and RIM were still attending to companies who mostly buy products according to price for value or price for functionality base, Apple and Google tended already to the consumer base who buy with heart and belly.
The wave and hype they created swashed back into the companies because, as we all know, the same people who buy as consumers are working in companies. Via this backdoor, iOS and Android made it into the companies as well.

Funny sidenote: Microsoft did the same with MS-DOS and Windows...
__________________
War doesn't prove who's right, only who's left...
Buddy1969 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01/10/2013, 11:50 AM   #80 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 755
It is beyond amazing that some believe the success of the iPad is due to advertising.
rnld is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

 

Thread Tools
Display Modes



 


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0