[kalel33]

Very encouraging. Wonder what that bunch over at Cupertino think ?

They probably think about open source WebOS as they are about WP7, Meego, and Bada, which probably hardly at all.

[a-crowder]

I hope determining the "intended project governance" doesn't turn into some corporate/organizational/political roadblock to the plan.

I think that's just the usual project mgmt milestone "are we on track" business.

[a-crowder]

Whatever happens, I'm just glad to see that webOS is finally stirring again. And if it goes open source, there will always be the possibility of community maintenance (you know, in case gets cold feet again)

[filmor_]

I'm pretty sure, that Qt is used for the backend (like Luna). If you want to make Qt applications for webOS you would still have to go the SDL path.

[cgk]

4. Official release is early enough (September) that if any of the smaller ODMs were planning on releasing a WebOS device that they could have it in a usable state for CES. Heck, they could probably have hardware ready for Christmas. (Assuming final validation/tweaks to the software September while the pre-qualified hardware is being assembled, finalized WebOS flashed & shipped from Asia in October, starts shipping to users mid/late November)

This is pure fantasy, even if it was possible why would anyone want this to happen? What could anyone turn out in this time-frame except for a rushed piece of crap?

[Rnp]

This is pure fantasy, even if it was possible why would anyone want this to happen? What could anyone turn out in this time-frame except for a rushed piece of crap?

Why? Let's gonna look for other side: "Why not?"

About time, remember that the Samsung made many changes in GTab 10 after see the IPad 2 in few days...

Or you believe that the things only works fast when use Android?


Best Regards...

[k4ever]

This is a reasonable timeline and probably better thought out than I expected. Maybe I'm jaded about HP but I suspect WOSI played a large part in making this good.

There are 4 big points I took from this simple schedule:

1. This maintains the viability of the WebOS ecosystem in the short term. Releasing Enyo first in a way that lets apps be cross-compiled to other environments (cough Android) gives the devs a revenue stream from their existing apps and, since there's no need to learn a new way of coding, encourages the creation of new WebOS apps (even if the real profit comes from sales to Android users)

2. It leverages existing platforms that have quite a few developers (Qt & Linux). Using a standard linux kernel means it becomes easier to compile replacements as you don't have to add any WebOS-specific libraries. More importantly, we get to use all the open source drivers as well as any redistributable closed-source drivers that work on the platform. Qt has quite a few followers, particularly in the Moblin/Meego crowd that was orphaned by Nokia/Intel/MS, so this may convince them to port apps to WebOS.

3. Supports new hardware. Barring the release of Enyo, the release schedule appears to be working from the kernel up to the final complete OS. That means any touch-screen hardware that boots a Qt-enabled Linux can be tested for WebOS compatibility.

4. Official release is early enough (September) that if any of the smaller ODMs were planning on releasing a WebOS device that they could have it in a usable state for CES. Heck, they could probably have hardware ready for Christmas. (Assuming final validation/tweaks to the software September while the pre-qualified hardware is being assembled, finalized WebOS flashed & shipped from Asia in October, starts shipping to users mid/late November)

Using the standard Linux Kernel means we can port webOS to the desktop with ease. Depending on the speed of your machine the kernel usually takes less than an hour to compile. As long as they release the source code for all of the other components as planned we could see webOS on the desktop by the end of the year. Using Qt was smart also. We can get some really cool KDE apps on webOS like Amarok.

[k4ever]

Very encouraging. Wonder what that bunch over at Cupertino think ?

Let's start preparing the lawsuits now.....

[k4ever]

I'm glad to see Enyo open sourced. Now we can finally get some decent (made for) tablet apps on Android. HP was smart with this move. Developers can develop good quality apps for webOS while developing them for other platforms.

[cgk]

We are never going to agree on this, if you think the best way to build share and relaunch is to rush out so-so hardware in a three month time-scale simply to get something out there then I think that is a recipe for disaster. What is needed is a compelling well thought device that will get column inches and attract the eye of the mass market - anything less will disappear into the dustbin of history.

Why? Let's gonna look for other side: "Why not?"

About time, remember that the Samsung made many changes in GTab 10 after see the IPad 2 in few days...

Or you believe that the things only works fast when use Android?


Best Regards...

Sent from my Lumia 800 using Board Express

[k4ever]

We are never going to agree on this, if you think the best way to build share and relaunch is to rush out so-so hardware in a three month time-scale simply to get something out there then I think that is a recipe for disaster. What is needed is a compelling well thought device that will get column inches and attract the eye of the mass market - anything less will disappear into the dustbin of history.




Sent from my Lumia 800 using Board Express

I agree with you to a point. I just hope we don't see the slew of crappy low end devices that Android has first. That will set a negative tone for webOS. However, we can't keep waiting around for "the device that will rule all other devices". We just need something that can go head to head with the current market leaders while offering something that compels consumers to buy the product. I just hope we don't get into an argument on every little useless spec.

[cgk]

I agree with you to a point. I just hope we don't see the slew of crappy low end devices that Android has first. That will set a negative tone for webOS. However, we can't keep waiting around for "the device that will rule all other devices". We just need something that can go head to head with the current market leaders while offering something that compels consumers to buy the product. I just hope we don't get into an argument on every little useless spec.

I don't think it needs to be "The device that will rule all other devices" but it needs to avoid being something that has simply rushed out to market without any real consideration of *why* that device exists and what gap it fills (beyond appealing to the very small niche of people who will buy anything that runs WebOS). Let's put it this way, I think we'd agree it has to be a comparable device to at least the middle of the market in regards to WP7, BB and Android devices? If it's not - why bother even realising it?

[rwhitby]

I hope determining the "intended project governance" doesn't turn into some corporate/organizational/political roadblock to the plan.

Think of this as meaning "How do non-HP people contribute to Open webOS".

-- Rod

[rwhitby]

This is a reasonable timeline and probably better thought out than I expected. Maybe I'm jaded about HP but I suspect WOSI played a large part in making this good.

Well, I didn't fly to the US two weeks ago for two days of meetings with HP for nothing ;-)

Be assured, this is primarily a HP plan, with some collaborative input from others.

Your analysis of the major roadmap milestones is also quite perceptive ...

-- Rod

[bluenote]

This scenario would require a lot of faith on the part of hardware manufacturers, specifically, the ability of a software company to deliver their product exactly on schedule. Especially, a company that isn't selling any of this software. Someone at HP opened a calendar and put in various milestones and now people here are looking at it like it's a bible. If things go a little slowly, it's not as if HP has much of a stake in it. For a hardware manufacturer, they would miss the holiday season and their hardware would languish.

Developers would also have to have faith that the platform that they are working on will someday have a viable user base. Very few developers would choose to create their apps on what is potentially a dead-end platform with the viable platforms as secondary targets. I just don't see legions of developers investing their efforts on open-source webOS in the hopes of having something that will work on Android and iOS. Users tend not to buy apps that look and feel like that.

Some early signs are encouraging:

1) Enyo released quickly in mid January about a month after open source plans were announced, with the Christmas holidays as a break inbetween. How many of us thought this might take until end of Feb or end of March.

2) When Enyo was released, we also got a roadmap. How many of us thought the roadmap would come later in the year?

3) When Enyo was released, concurrently we also saw two apps ported with it--paper mache and flash cards. How many of us thought we not get real world examples concurrent with release?

4) Head of webOS open source appointed and a guy noted for saying he would like to build a product line from start to finish (google articles on him leaving MSFT for HP, I don't remember the citation but was easy to find) . Seems like commitment on HP's part. Also since they are paying webOS engineers (dont they have 500-600 on staff?), this type of early speed makes Meg's remarks that we would see webOS on at least one HP device if not two devices in 2013, seem more plausible.

5) I don't know much but the idea that the kernel is going to be Linux seems smart even to me as I watch the devs struggling with kernel issues on other software ports.

Seems like we are off to a good start and there is fresh energy in the webOS arena.

[jcerwinske]

Somehow I missed this from the Palm blog post

Upcoming releases include our distribution of WebKit, which will support not only HTML5, but also Silverlight and Flash through the use of plug-ins. It will enable the rendering of webpages to HTML Canvas and 3-D textures, and will support a wide range of application interfaces, including multi-touch.

Can you say "Netflix in the browser?"

[kigmatzomat]

This is pure fantasy, even if it was possible why would anyone want this to happen? What could anyone turn out in this time-frame except for a rushed piece of crap?

I dunno...the Kindle Fire? It used the same reference platform as the Blackberry Playbook. The only real differences between the two is the external case and the OS that was loaded onto it. And when you get down to it, all three are flavors of Unix (QNX vs Android/Linux vs WebOS/Linux).

Which gets to my point that hardware could be built using a reference design, the hardware tested against Ubuntu or some other flavor of Linux over the summer, and even have kernel optimizations prior to the full release of WebOS.

I wouldn't trust a built-from-scratch hardware design thrown together in a couple of months; that would likely be crappy. Reference designs, however, have already been through a qualification process and have significant engineering behind them. So I would be willing to buy a TouchPad Go built to nVidia's Tegra2 reference design, similar to the Acer Transformer or Transformer Prime tablet (excluding the dock, that's soooo not reference).

However in all honesty, I don't expect any real name brand devices at Christmas or CES. What I *do* expect is that one or more Chinese Android tablet makers will decide to ship tablets that are WebOS-qualified and that *maybe* have a WebOS/Android CD in the box to let people play with that. Which gives developers something to test against, which is the main goal.

And I still have hopes for a Kickstarter-esque project to have one of those reference-design devices manufactured for the community on spec.

[k4ever]

I don't think it needs to be "The device that will rule all other devices" but it needs to avoid being something that has simply rushed out to market without any real consideration of *why* that device exists and what gap it fills (beyond appealing to the very small niche of people who will buy anything that runs WebOS). Let's put it this way, I think we'd agree it has to be a comparable device to at least the middle of the market in regards to WP7, BB and Android devices? If it's not - why bother even realising it?

I would set the standards higher than that field. We know if it is not comparable to whatever version of the iPad is available at the time, its going to have a hard time.

[jcerwinske]

Don't Adobe and/or Microsoft have to make the plug in to enable this? Otherwise, wouldn't Linux and Chrome OS already have it?

I've been reading the quote over and over trying to parse what it really means..

Upcoming releases include our distribution of WebKit, which will support not only HTML5, but also Silverlight and Flash through the use of plug-ins.

I had the same thought as you a little while after I made previous post... I thought, "oh maybe he just means Enyo components/hooks to Flash and Silverlight plugins", since Enyo now runs on things like IE, and Firefox on Windows, which support those plugins.

But he does specifically say "our distribution of Webkit," not Enyo.

"Our distribution of Webkit" is what powers the webOS browser and SDK apps, no? Unless HP is planning on entering the browser wars, releasing a cross-platform browser based on it's own Webkit distribution, what then would be the point of targeting Silverlight plugin support, if not an attempt to get Silverlight on webOS?

The only other thing I can think of is maybe some kind of cross effort with their Windows tablet objectives?

Or maybe he meant Enyo and the wires got crossed in the context talking about Webkit? I guess we'll have to wait and see what...err...develops. (pun not intended)

[k4ever]

I've been reading the quote over and over trying to parse what it really means..



I had the same thought as you a little while after I made previous post... I thought, "oh maybe he just means Enyo components/hooks to Flash and Silverlight plugins", since Enyo now runs on things like IE, and Firefox on Windows, which support those plugins.

But he does specifically say "our distribution of Webkit," not Enyo.

"Our distribution of Webkit" is what powers the webOS browser and SDK apps, no? Unless HP is planning on entering the browser wars, releasing a cross-platform browser based on it's own Webkit distribution, what then would be the point of targeting Silverlight plugin support, if not an attempt to get Silverlight on webOS?

The only other thing I can think of is maybe some kind of cross effort with their Windows tablet objectives?

Or maybe he meant Enyo and the wires got crossed in the context talking about Webkit? I guess we'll have to wait and see what...err...develops. (pun not intended)

I hope he meant that we will finally receive the Silverlight plugin. Wouldn't that make webOS the only mobile OS to have a Silverlight plugin? Does Windows Phone have it or do they just have a NetFlix app?