[ursula]

I really don't think it's a big deal for hardware makers to support WebOS. WebOS could EASILY become something like Ubuntu if the proper steps are taken. (I made a thread about this.)

[kalel33]

I really don't think it's a big deal for hardware makers to support WebOS. WebOS could EASILY become something like Ubuntu if the proper steps are taken. (I made a thread about this.)

The goal is to be like Ubuntu, where it has less than a 1% of marketshare on desktops? I've actually never even seen anyone running Ubuntu. WebOS would be better shooting for what Windows Mobile is now for marketshare to show success......not great but at least on the map.

[Mikey47]

I really don't think it's a big deal for hardware makers to support WebOS. WebOS could EASILY become something like Ubuntu if the proper steps are taken. (I made a thread about this.)

The reason why ubuntu has enjoyed the success that it has (which is really limited) is that there is a massive amount of hardware out there to run it. The hardware (basically any pc) has very well defined and standardized APIs. That PC hardware is very stable and relatively unchanging. Right now that doesn't exist for mobile hardware.

I live ubuntu and run it on 2 out of our 3 computers, but i just don't see this happening for webOS anytime soon. The mobile market is just a completely different ballgame.

[SnotBoogie]

I have to question this somewhat. HP couldn't find a buyer willing to pay decent money for WebOS. Google paid $12.5 billion just to shore up their patents. If the patents so untouchable then why didn't HTC, Samsung, or even Google buy it? Palm has the upperhand because they are a niche market. If they ever made it to the big leagues then I'd bet that's when Microsoft would pounce to make some money. Nobody ever sues the small companies, they hit'em when they make it big to get the most money. Microsoft makes more off of Android then they do their own OS.

people always say Palm has patents and that will protect them but it's not a really precise statement. Sure they have patents but the real issue is are they relevant and are they valid. You may have lots of car engine patents and one on a diesel engine but it's not gonna protect someone if the dispute is over the design of an electronic car engine. Even in this case this is about formatting unstructured text so people can use the text to do stuff. Now Palm may have a thousand patents related to cell phones but if one of them isn't the a valid patent for the exact same text formatting actions it's not protection. Hell if Palm patents a different method it's not gonna be protection either even if the end result is the same. Now maybe the different method is something someone would license as an alternative to using someone else's patented tech but they'd still get sued until they switched like HTC is switching. now how valuable their patent portfolio really is is likely known mostly by the patent lawyers working in the smartphone and electronics field with engineering degrees and the actual engineers that have a good idea on what tech will be being used in the near future. If you just invented the internal combustion engine you're not to worried about the guy with the buggy whip patents because you have a good idea of what's coming in the future.

Regardless, Palm has lots of patents no doubt, but whether they apply or are relevant now to what phone companies are making or to a specific company's technology is a whole different question. The reality is the patents just may not apply.

The goal is to be like Ubuntu, where it has less than a 1% of marketshare on desktops? I've actually never even seen anyone running Ubuntu. WebOS would be better shooting for what Windows Mobile is now for marketshare to show success......not great but at least on the map.

yeah i never get the idea that Ubuntu is the goal. I know nobody that runs these ubuntu or linux or many other niche OSs. I know of them but to me these are things that right now appeal much more to the hobbyist, hacker, tinkerer, etc type. But to have the needed success i think webos needed or needs to be much much more then that.

[SnotBoogie]

What people around here don't seem to understand is the vast difference in marketshare between Ubuntu as a desktop operating system and ubuntu as a server platform and the fact that a vast majority of chatter surrounding the OS is around the latter use case.

Even then, neither popular use of Ubuntu have any remotely dominant marketshare and the desktop version is largely flailing in the face of new Linux variants such as Mint after the public clusterfsck over Unity on the Desktop.

Desktop: Let me put it in terms people might absorb, and anyone here can Google this till your heart's content: Linux--and I mean all flavors, including Ubuntu--as a desktop OS comprise a little over 1% of the desktop marketshare. Combined. So you want webOS to be less popular?

Do let that sink in for a moment, folks. Again, feel free to Google 'linux desktop marketshare.'

Server: Ubuntu as a server platform entertains a much larger share than that of its Desktop variant comparative to its own space, but it's still nowhere near the penetration of even its other Linux brethren in RedHat and CentOS. I personally use 10.10 64-Bit for a server I lease in Europe because of its personal ease of configuration and balls-deep documentation, but comparing the "success" of Ubuntu as a server platform with the goals of webOS is a false comparison and every bit as misguided a goal to strive for.

Bottom Line: Should it be a goal to emulate Ubuntu? Only if you have no goddamned clue what you're talking about and latched onto because it sounded "open-sourcey" enough to appear credible around here. ProTip: It's not.

i just think a lot of webos fans tend to think about these things from a perspective that is quite different then the average phone users. but if you can't get the more average mainstream people the products just aren't gonna get the support that people hear seem to be asking for. like if you want netflix apps or all the things people want well they don't come unless netflix decides to make it and they don't if there's not enough users. And if it's like ubuntu or some other less mainstream os it's gonna be a niche device. the goal has to be much higher.

[deCorvett]

i just think a lot of webos fans tend to think about these things from a perspective that is quite different then the average phone users. but if you can't get the more average mainstream people the products just aren't gonna get the support that people hear seem to be asking for. like if you want netflix apps or all the things people want well they don't come unless netflix decides to make it and they don't if there's not enough users. And if it's like ubuntu or some other less mainstream os it's gonna be a niche device. the goal has to be much higher.

This. I've been posting about this. Without webOS devices, this isn't going to work, no matter on how many devices you can boot webOS on.

[ursula]

No, I do know what I'm talking about. And if anyone thinks WebOS will be the next Android in any time in the future doesn't know what they're talking about. WebOS will most likely NOT be picked up by any manufacturers in the future besides MAYBE, and I'm screaming maybe at the top of my lungs, a couple obscure Asian companies will throw it on one of their low end GSM devices that will never make it to the U.S. Three quarters of you are living in a dream and it's getting old. When I mean WebOS becomes something like Ubuntu, I mean it becomes an alternative to other operating systems by means of DIY. Android, iOS, and WP7 aren't going anywhere but up.

I love WebOS just as much as the next, but your kidding yourself if you think the heads of companies give a rats. "HTC released the first Android!!!" Yeah because they weren't making anymore money with WinMo 6 than the next guy. Even with hardware makers coughing up 15$ to Microsoft they are making more money than they ever were. HTC, Samsung, Motorola (especially now since they were bought by Google), and everyone else DOES NOT and I repeat DOES NOT care about WebOS.

[SnotBoogie]

No, I do know what I'm talking about. And if anyone thinks WebOS will be the next Android in any time in the future doesn't know what they're talking about. WebOS will most likely NOT be picked up by any manufacturers in the future besides MAYBE, and I'm screaming maybe at the top of my lungs, a couple obscure Asian companies will throw it on one of their low end GSM devices that will never make it to the U.S. Three quarters of you are living in a dream and it's getting old. When I mean WebOS becomes something like Ubuntu, I mean it becomes an alternative to other operating systems by means of DIY. Android, iOS, and WP7 aren't going anywhere but up.

I love WebOS just as much as the next, but your kidding yourself if you think the heads of companies give a rats. "HTC released the first Android!!!" Yeah because they weren't making anymore money with WinMo 6 than the next guy. Even with hardware makers coughing up 15$ to Microsoft they are making more money than they ever were. HTC, Samsung, Motorola (especially now since they were bought by Google), and everyone else DOES NOT and I repeat DOES NOT care about WebOS.

I think you're kinda you're making a point against an argument that most people really didn't make. I surely didn't say, "WebOS will be the next Android", few people except the zealots i think honestly believe that and few have said, "it will be picked up by other makers." i think there's a difference in predicting my personal idea of what the future will be and what i think the people should aim for. i was talking about the latter. Hell i'm closer to the Webos is dead camp but for my money that doesn't mean they should aim low. i think if you're gonna do it aim fricken high.

point is if the goal of Webos is just to be ubuntu the goal is utter failure for me. To me success isn't winning traction with the tinkerer or the hobbyist it's winning the mainstream. I'm not even saying i think webos actually can be more. Personally i don't think Webos will ever be more then for tinkerers. But that being said if you want the platform to prosper, being ubuntu which almost nobody uses isn't close to enough. I agree which most of your assessment of the future and even the idea that it may end up being like ubuntu. Problem is Ubuntu is something that i'd almost never want to use. And if Webos is something i never want to use then it's in a bad place from my perspective. I don't think it will ever be android just like you. I still think you try to. Even if it's futile.

[kalel33]

I think you're kinda you're making a point against an argument that most people really didn't make. I surely didn't say, "WebOS will be the next Android", few people except the zealots i think honestly believe that and few have said, "it will be picked up by other makers." i think there's a difference in predicting my personal idea of what the future will be and what i think the people should aim for. i was talking about the latter. Hell i'm closer to the Webos is dead camp but for my money that doesn't mean they should aim low. i think if you're gonna do it aim fricken high

Yeah, I think if they're aiming for a very small niche product then they should have sold it for whatever they could have, even if was only for $500 million. They'll never make near that amount of money at Ubuntu level of marketshare. They should have just sold it to Amazon and licked their wounds in the corner. Then, WebOS would have had a backer who would have put everything they had in it to make it successful.

[cgk]

Really I think after they failed to sell it, this was simply the cheapest way of running it down as a business unit without taking a big q1 2012 charge. If the few people left can make a success of it, Meg will step forward as a big visionary, if they can't, she's simply say it was the market.

To me, when considering the market, the actual OS and hardware are generally only a small part of the overall picture and I think marketing, carrier and retail relationships are just as important, if not more so. I look at (back of a *** packet estimate), Microsoft and it's partners spending upwards of $750 million dollars on marketing activities alone and the limited success of WP7 and have to wonder who will is going to be willing to stump up similar sums for WebOS or even something like Tizen?

Edit: Huh... I can't use the word F-A-G. it seems, it means cigarette to us brits.

[tholap]

It's clear that HP doesn't want to heavily invest in webOS.
And heavy investment would be needed to make it into an IOS like platform success.

But HP needs *something* for their aging PC biz. They have to have a mobile strategy. For now they seem to fall back to their old go to solution - MS Windows. But Windows 7 is a fail on tablets and W8 has a very unsure future.

Open sourcing webOS and supporting it on the cheap to keep it viable keeps it around as a backup. HP forgoes the advantages of owning the platform (together with the cost and risk of doing so) - but on the plus side shared costs with enthusiasts and potential future partners.

Android has its problems (patent wars, oracle-java and Google-rola) and there is a chance that at least one of the players wants an alternative.

And true open-source has its advantages. For example governments and and other large institutions like to be able to check the source.

I wouldn't bet on webOS becoming an sort of success (beyond enthusiast hacker communities), but I wouldn't rule it out either.

A Dalvik port would make things very interesting. The strengths of webOS married to androids app selection (or at least a viable subset like the Amazon market) would be a potentially strong comeback combination *if* at least one manufacturer produces devices.

I agree with those who think that there won't be any kind of mass market success without somebody actually offering dedicated hardware with webOS pre-installed.

An open source webOS will survive. There's enough hackers around who like to have their own nice accessible platform to keep it available for anybody who is willing to install on compatible devices. But that's a tiny sub 1% community that commercial app developers will ignore.

-- Sent from my TouchPad using Communities

[kalel33]

An open source webOS will survive. There's enough hackers around who like to have their own nice accessible platform to keep it available for anybody who is willing to install on compatible devices. But that's a tiny sub 1% community that commercial app developers will ignore.

-- Sent from my TouchPad using Communities

Yeah, but the problem with that statement is those hackers/tinkerers, like me, already have an open source OS that they've installed on their mobile device, it's called Android. I'm running CM7 on my phone now and it's so much faster and less glitchy than the bloated stock Android on phones. You'd have to offer the hackers something that gives you more ability than Android and even though WebOS is a great tablet OS, it still is lacking in functionality and especially apps for a phone.

[cgk]

But even ubunutu gets to 1% because PC hardware is em.. common in a way that phone hardware is not, there is not a HP distro of it, a dell distro of it etc etc. Phone hardware is not the same in this regard, so the number of people who will try this will be many many times lower.

[Rockbeast]

... I look at (back of a *** packet estimate), ...

Edit: Huh... I can't use the word F-A-G. it seems, it means cigarette to us brits.

That word is typically used as a derogatory term when referring to someone as homosexual. If that last word is blocked, I mean someone who's preference for an intimate partner is of the same gender as they, and usually it is referring to a male. Sometimes the letters "ot" are added to the first 3 letters. It has the cigarette meaning too, or a smallish piece of burning wood/coal, but as is often the case in popular culture, a word can get an unintended meaning that is perpetuated and becomes the 'new' meaning of the word.

For instance, where I live there is the main street in downtown called Gay Street. I think the original meaning was merry - cheerful - jolly - joyful - blithe - mirthful. But if you tell someone today, The theater is on Gay Street, they will often snicker and say "why did you name your street that?" To which I reply "I guess people are merry - cheerful - jolly - joyful - blithe - mirthful when they are going to the theater on Gay Street."

OK, so I totally missed saying anything about the actual topic. Well...I sure would like to see open source turn webOS around...since no one or nothing else will. I'm even planning on getting a Pre2 to replace my aging Pre+ (VZW) to keep using my accessories and keep hope alive.

[zukny]

Interesting thread, but I have read multiple times on this site now about how people think WebOS can or can-not be the next Android..

Let me throw this out there, when Apple came back out of no-where back in the day the knock on them was that Developers didn't make applications for their computers & that in order to do anything you had to go Windows..

Well apple did something Amazing that no one ever talks about, and it might be the real reason it has succeeded so well today. Apple began making their own Applications that stood out among the rest: Garageband, Iphoto, Imovie, Itunes were HUGE when it came to creating a computer for the every day person.

Instead of talking about making WebOS work on every device possible, people should put a lot more emphasis on a 4-5 applications that will create vibes throughout the internet!

1. a podcast- Music application that can rival garageband
2. a simple video editing program specifically made for uploading videos to youtube
3. A program that out competes any when it comes to schoolbooks & writing notes. all inclusive type of deal
and
4. Sports.. Gotta get live sports on your webOS device.. I don't care how you do it, but an app that streams all live sports (cost I dont' care)


The fact is, you can put WebOS on every device in the world but people aren't going to use it until they see it do something they can't do.. Or at least don't expect to do. When Apple came out w/ Ilife people thought the world of it and no longer saw the necessity to stay w/ Windows. As a matter of fact, a lot of people went to apple not realizing you can make a Podcast on other computers.. I know this message is long, but the point has remained the same. Great applications need to be made to save WebOS

[p41m3r]

The way i've understood the patent situation is that HP doesn't own most of the best palm patents, but that webOS itself is licensed for those patents in perpetuity.

Where did you get that? Perpetual licenses of this kind are expensive and are not usually sought out in these situations since there is uncertainty and constant change. Maybe those are involved somewhere but the only one I've read about - Garnet license from Access - is irrelevant and was used by Palm, Inc. on Treos, Centros and in the webOS 1.x ROM.

[kalel33]

When Apple came out w/ Ilife people thought the world of it and no longer saw the necessity to stay w/ Windows. As a matter of fact, a lot of people went to apple not realizing you can make a Podcast on other computers.. I know this message is long, but the point has remained the same. Great applications need to be made to save WebOS

Macs make up 5% of the market share. Windows Phone 7 has better market share in the mobile market than Macs do in the computer business, yet everyone states that WP7 had an abysmal year. Even with their own apps, Macs still command just a very small amount of the personal computer sales. I don't see how the analogy works in this case.

[cgk]

Even with their own apps, Macs still command just a very small amount of the personal computer sales.

And they don't actually care about that because they aren't scrapping it for 5-6% margin with the grey box shifters like HP, a single mac product line for apple turns more profit than the whole of the PSG does for HP. Market share is a useful measure for a lot of things but in isolation it's is misleading.

[nusome4]

Market share is a useful measure for a lot of things but in isolation it's is misleading.

You, sir, said something that is so true, but everyone totally ignores when talking about market share.

Like an OS that is becoming so fragmented that people are now starting to say that it is a foundation to build off of instead of an OS (Android).

[kalel33]

And they don't actually care about that because they aren't scrapping it for 5-6% margin with the grey box shifters like HP, a single mac product line for apple turns more profit than the whole of the PSG does for HP. Market share is a useful measure for a lot of things but in isolation it's is misleading.

I understand that aspect but the person I was commenting on thought WebOS could be like the Mac. I was explaining the market share because it's not that much and the reason why Apple is a success is because the charge a premium for their products. They can command that price because they have been able to market the impression, true or not, that their system is better built, OS more refined, and you feel you just have an overall better experience. Nobody will say that WebOS is on better hardware than most, more refined than most, and have an overall better experience(perceived) than the competitors.

Truthfully, I think a desktop OS, like Windows 8, will be the future of tablets. The speed and power of the tablets are increasing dramatically to be able to handle it. You'd get the best of both worlds, which is what Windows is trying to do with Windows 8.