[Vistaus]

Linux Today - Android phone makers back platform but consider other options

So after all phone makers *are* looking for alternatives. This should motivate HP to jump in.

[rwhitby]

Linux Today - Android phone makers back platform but consider other options

So after all phone makers *are* looking for alternatives. This should motivate HP to jump in.

The only people to state that theory are 'industry analysts' and press people.

No phone maker has uttered such.

Draw your own conclusions...

-- Rod

[bluenote]

Thanks

The source for that story seems to be here:
Android phone makers look to alternatives

The main idea is that Samsung announced a Windows phone last week. The story says that if some others are considering alternatives, we won't know for awhile as the Apple/Samsung ruling was just announced this past week and the phones coming out now were made last quarter. Also a big factor is consumer adoption. My guess is that if Windows takes off, we might see some others besides Nokia/Samsung jumping in next year. This is a big "If" but I imagine some of the phone makers may be starting talks now to prepare in case consumer adoption happens.

The other unknown is if Apple/Samsung (Google) will settle and if so, what will be the licensing fees and the cost therefore of the android phones. I imagine this is pretty important as I am sure some of the popularity of android is due to its low cost. Apple may be seeking to drive up the license fee to cut out some of the low end models.

I was hoping webOS might sneak in here if somehow android apps would be able to be run on the phone. There is a company called Open Mobile which announced in May on their website that they would have an emulator by end of Q3. We have not heard a date from them since so they might have abandoned the project. If so, I wonder how hard it would be for webOS devs to create a dalvik emulator for open webOS.

[rwhitby]

Thanks

The source for that story seems to be here:
Android phone makers look to alternatives

That story is purely based on the hear-say of unnamed "industry watchers". Same as all other previous stories of that type. It's a common technique of journalists to try and get interest in a "story" which has no verifiable factual basis.

I wonder how hard it would be for webOS devs to create a dalvik emulator for open webOS.

To do so would put you at legal risk of a suit from Oracle, which would cripple any developer even if unfounded.

-- Rod

[jcmarcos]

create a dalvik emulator for open webOS.

To do so would put you at legal risk of a suit from Oracle

I thought that Dalvik, while being a Java ripoff, was free of legal attachments to Oracle. How come that are several prominent Dalvik clones out there in the wild? Or does RIM pay Oracle for the Dalvik clone inside their Android emulator inside their PlayBook?

[bluenote]

Ok thanks too bad on both counts. i wonder if the OpenMobileWW guys have squared any licensing issues they might have or if this is the reason why we have not heard much from them.

You are closer to the industry than I am so you would know better than I if any other phone maker was considering in the future making a Windows phone (besides Samsung who apparently announced one last week.)

[Vistaus]

OpenMobile did respond in the thread here on webOS Nation not even 2 weeks ago saying they're still on track for Q3.

[chalx]

Well, Samsung and HTC are avare of open webOS and probably will play with it in their labs, just to check it.
OEMs are always interested in alternatives, but I'm afraid not in webOS.

[bluenote]

The Verge is reporting that the HTC Sept 19th event is likely to announce a new windows phone.
Of course they could be wrong.

[Garrett92C]

The Verge is reporting that the HTC Sept 19th event is likely to announce a new windows phone.
Of course they could be wrong.

I wouldn't be surprised... HTC (and Samsung) has been making WP phones for quite a while now. They're overdue for a refresh.

[Buddy1969]

ATM it looks like they go for anything but WebOS as a fallback scenario. WP8, Tizen, etc ... you name it.

There are so many alternatives out there, where is WebOS's unique selling proposition? Well WE enthusiasts know what makes WebOS stand out, but no one else does. This is reflected in the lack of interest.

Good marketing, HP. I think they learned that from Palm.

[RumoredNow]

There are so many alternatives out there, where is WebOS's unique selling proposition?

Open Source is the 4th gen release. 3 generations of hard, real world use for proof of concept. That saves a lot of R&D time and money over starting up from scratch... Also there is a (shrinking, but still existent) ecosystem, developer base and user base that can be improved and expanded. Saving time and money.

Tizen has already got Samsung's fingerprints all over it and will likely continue on with S.

Win Phone costs licensing fees and guidelines that must be adhered to from Msft.

RIM doesn't appear to be interested in licensing BB, or selling themselves to save their own skins. Probably gun shy over what HP did to Palm so who can blame them.

Who else? Meego? Maemo? Already fractured...

Building a working OS that can survive actual deployment takes a lot of time. There is no shortcut for a start up to get to the point where webOS is going to be when it goes full Open Source release.

Don't forget also, webOS has roots in PalmOS which developed parallel to Windows Mobile. Then PalmOS was rebuilt from ground up into webOS much as Win-Mo was rebuilt into Windows Phone when consumer focus shifted from PDAs to SmartPhones.

That kind of pedigree for development is hard to come by. What other freeware can match that sophisticated level of development in the mobile community? PalmOS was a known and marketable brand when Android and iOS were not even in the planning stages and webOS benefited from the lessons Palm learned from the PDA wars.

IMHO the failures of webOS are not ones of usability and lack of user enthusiasm. Palm was forced to do what they did because of economies of scale. They could not grow as fast as they needed due to being unable to meet the highest order amounts to secure the best prices and delivery schedules on components. Which was a self-perpetuating problem. They faced increased per unit costs and scaled down production compared to the largest players. So they couldn't sell enough units to get to the highest tier of component purchase - so they couldn't build and sell enough units to get to the highest tier of component purchase... Cycle after cycle which drained their resources.

HP's farcical decision to abandon consumer hardware production for their mobile division was based on what? Not the previous board's study of the desirability of Palm and valuating their worth at $1,000,000,000 and the avowed 3 year commitment to allow it time to become profitable with adequate financial backing. It seems more like a petty tantrum of some kind. A kid smashing his Lego castle because he doesn't want a bath right now. That doesn't have anything to do with the Legos other than being an unfortunate target at the wrong time. HP's halt to phone and tablet production for webOS has about as much to do with the OS as it has to do with bath time...

[josephandrews222]

Open Source is the 4th gen release. 3 generations of hard, real world use for proof of concept. That saves a lot of R&D time and money over starting up from scratch... Also there is a (shrinking, but still existent) ecosystem, developer base and user base that can be improved and expanded. Saving time and money.

Tizen has already got Samsung's fingerprints all over it and will likely continue on with S.

Win Phone costs licensing fees and guidelines that must be adhered to from Msft.

RIM doesn't appear to be interested in licensing BB, or selling themselves to save their own skins. Probably gun shy over what HP did to Palm so who can blame them.

Who else? Meego? Maemo? Already fractured...

Building a working OS that can survive actual deployment takes a lot of time. There is no shortcut for a start up to get to the point where webOS is going to be when it goes full Open Source release.

Don't forget also, webOS has roots in PalmOS which developed parallel to Windows Mobile. Then PalmOS was rebuilt from ground up into webOS much as Win-Mo was rebuilt into Windows Phone when consumer focus shifted from PDAs to SmartPhones.

That kind of pedigree for development is hard to come by. What other freeware can match that sophisticated level of development in the mobile community? PalmOS was a known and marketable brand when Android and iOS were not even in the planning stages and webOS benefited from the lessons Palm learned from the PDA wars.

IMHO the failures of webOS are not ones of usability and lack of user enthusiasm. Palm was forced to do what they did because of economies of scale. They could not grow as fast as they needed due to being unable to meet the highest order amounts to secure the best prices and delivery schedules on components. Which was a self-perpetuating problem. They faced increased per unit costs and scaled down production compared to the largest players. So they couldn't sell enough units to get to the highest tier of component purchase - so they couldn't build and sell enough units to get to the highest tier of component purchase... Cycle after cycle which drained their resources.

HP's farcical decision to abandon consumer hardware production for their mobile division was based on what? Not the previous board's study of the desirability of Palm and valuating their worth at $1,000,000,000 and the avowed 3 year commitment to allow it time to become profitable with adequate financial backing. It seems more like a petty tantrum of some kind. A kid smashing his Lego castle because he doesn't want a bath right now. That doesn't have anything to do with the Legos other than being an unfortunate target at the wrong time. HP's halt to phone and tablet production for webOS has about as much to do with the OS as it has to do with bath time...

I think that what you have written is correct. Thanks for the post.

[ewl88]

Open Source is the 4th gen release. 3 generations of hard, real world use for proof of concept. That saves a lot of R&D time and money over starting up from scratch... Also there is a (shrinking, but still existent) ecosystem, developer base and user base that can be improved and expanded. Saving time and money.

Tizen has already got Samsung's fingerprints all over it and will likely continue on with S.

Win Phone costs licensing fees and guidelines that must be adhered to from Msft.

RIM doesn't appear to be interested in licensing BB, or selling themselves to save their own skins. Probably gun shy over what HP did to Palm so who can blame them.

Who else? Meego? Maemo? Already fractured...

Building a working OS that can survive actual deployment takes a lot of time. There is no shortcut for a start up to get to the point where webOS is going to be when it goes full Open Source release.

Don't forget also, webOS has roots in PalmOS which developed parallel to Windows Mobile. Then PalmOS was rebuilt from ground up into webOS much as Win-Mo was rebuilt into Windows Phone when consumer focus shifted from PDAs to SmartPhones.

That kind of pedigree for development is hard to come by. What other freeware can match that sophisticated level of development in the mobile community? PalmOS was a known and marketable brand when Android and iOS were not even in the planning stages and webOS benefited from the lessons Palm learned from the PDA wars.

IMHO the failures of webOS are not ones of usability and lack of user enthusiasm. Palm was forced to do what they did because of economies of scale. They could not grow as fast as they needed due to being unable to meet the highest order amounts to secure the best prices and delivery schedules on components. Which was a self-perpetuating problem. They faced increased per unit costs and scaled down production compared to the largest players. So they couldn't sell enough units to get to the highest tier of component purchase - so they couldn't build and sell enough units to get to the highest tier of component purchase... Cycle after cycle which drained their resources.

HP's farcical decision to abandon consumer hardware production for their mobile division was based on what? Not the previous board's study of the desirability of Palm and valuating their worth at $1,000,000,000 and the avowed 3 year commitment to allow it time to become profitable with adequate financial backing. It seems more like a petty tantrum of some kind. A kid smashing his Lego castle because he doesn't want a bath right now. That doesn't have anything to do with the Legos other than being an unfortunate target at the wrong time. HP's halt to phone and tablet production for webOS has about as much to do with the OS as it has to do with bath time...

Very detailed and good analysis. I think Palm's lack of economy of scale made them skimp on materials and Palm never got the sense of quality it needed to be taken seriously. And performance on stock Pre (without overclocking, patches) was bad. Casual users who just played with palm devices in a store (sprint, or verizon's back area behind bigger sellers) never got to see the advantages of webOS. No doubt HP's decision to kill webOS devices was impulsive and self-destructive.
The big question is why other oems don't do android. Android's not perfect but is being developed rapidly, has large install base, can be skinned or be kept stock. The bigger android oems like samsung can fork or create their own version of android and ecosystem like Amazon did. So is Open webOS worth taking a risk on? I think and hope so but it will have to be a respectable OEM who can build a quality device.

[Buddy1969]

I think what RumoredNow wrote is all good and right. And from an enthusiasts standpoint I thank him very much for posting this.

But is this enough incentive for manufacturers to pack WebOS on their devices?
Is it enough incentive for a customer to buy another device with WebOS?

Or is it rather, that there are very little apps and nealy no new one`s? That there are very little devs left to tend to the customers app needs? I think these are the major show stoppers and this is where the cat bites it's own tail: no manufacturer because of no apps/devs -> no apps/devs because of no manufacturer.

How do we break this cycle?

[rwhitby]

no manufacturer because of no apps/devs -> no apps/devs because of no manufacturer.

How do we break this cycle?

1) Become an app developer, and develop for webOS.
2) Become a manufacturer, and use webOS on your devices.
3) Use your current device and current apps, and stop reading forums and worrying about it.

Those are the only three constructive options.

There are a few other options that will definitely not help in any way:

4) Post messages on forums about how bad things are.
5) Post messages on forums about other platforms.
6) Post messages on forums about how someone else should do something.

-- Rod

[Buddy1969]

1) Become an app developer, and develop for webOS.
2) Become a manufacturer, and use webOS on your devices.
3) Use your current device and current apps, and stop reading forums and worrying about it.

Those are the only three constructive options.
...

-- Rod

Honestly? I mean, are we discussing about how WebOS gets successful on the market?
Because if this is so, I can't very much relate to the above points as
1) a platform where a user must become developer and make their own apps won't be successful at all. Check out other platform and guess roughly: how many of the users are not familiar with programming? The bigger part, I recon.
2) become a manufacturer? Seriously? You do know that this is not like "ok, today I am working at a grocery store and tomorrow I am hardware manufacturer" ?
3) How would using my current device and current apps make WebOS more successful and break the deadlock between manufacturer and developer? Can't see that.

My question in the above posing was not intended to troll someone but was honestly asked. I see the problem and ask if anyone knows a solution. I really didn't expect a sarcastic answer to that, but it seems, that many die hard WebOS fans (oh yes I am one, too, that's why I am still using this platform) don't want to read about problems and what we can do against it, they want to read about "peace and love and good happyness stuff" (to cite a song from Steve Vai).

Noted.

[rwhitby]

Honestly? I mean, are we discussing about how WebOS gets successful on the market?
Because if this is so, I can't very much relate to the above points as
1) a platform where a user must become developer and make their own apps won't be successful at all. Check out other platform and guess roughly: how many of the users are not familiar with programming? The bigger part, I recon.
2) become a manufacturer? Seriously? You do know that this is not like "ok, today I am working at a grocery store and tomorrow I am hardware manufacturer" ?
3) How would using my current device and current apps make WebOS more successful and break the deadlock between manufacturer and developer? Can't see that.

My question in the above posing was not intended to troll someone but was honestly asked. I see the problem and ask if anyone knows a solution. I really didn't expect a sarcastic answer to that, but it seems, that many die hard WebOS fans (oh yes I am one, too, that's why I am still using this platform) don't want to read about problems and what we can do against it, they want to read about "peace and love and good happyness stuff" (to cite a song from Steve Vai).

Noted.

You are assuming that a small community of users can actually do something which can significantly affect the success of webOS in the market, when the company that owns webOS has no such commercial plans publicly announced.

You should look closely at that assumption.

-- Rod

[Buddy1969]

You are assuming that a small community of users can actually do something which can significantly affect the success of webOS in the market, when the company that owns webOS has no such commercial plans publicly announced.
...
-- Rod

No, actually I am not.
I was the one who above hinted at the problem, that an OS which is not supported won't be used. And I extend on that and add: no matter which device it runs on it won't be bought with webOS on it, if there is no support by company and by developers.
And an OS which won't be bought won't be supported (by devs and/or a hardwarecompany likewise)

This is a cycle not supported->not bought->not supported-> ... etc.

My question was therefore:
How do we (as a small community) break our favorite OS out of this cycle. How can we get WebOS to appeal to more people or better even companies?

You are of course right, that as a very small and dwindling community, we have not much leverage on the market, especially with a company like HP in the background who don't want to invest anymore into this asset.

Let's look at our community. I see roughly following groups (correct me if I leave someone out unintentionally)
--> There are people like the WebOS Internals guys who are constantly helping WebOS to no die (yet) and I applaud them for their effort.
--> There are the phoenix people from whom I don't see much, except for some nice short poems on Twitter yet.
--> And there are people like me who are not so much into programming (I was once, biut that was 15 years ago) . All we can do is donate (which I did and do), buy/use apps (which I did and do) and show off their devices to the people around them.

As for showing off, this was really nice, as long as there was hardware to buy. Nowadays it becomes a painstakingly arduous task, because you show all the niceties of WebOS and after all the "Uuuuhs" and "Aaaahs" you get the question "I wanna buy it, where can I get it?" and have to admit "Sorry for the teaser, guys, but there is only hope yet, that there once will be hardware to support WebOS again".
Therefore my "demonstration runs" have ceased a bit in the last few months.

It is a difficult time for us WebOS affiliates. And my question was: what more can we do?

I asked this in expection for suggestions in earnest, ideas of the brainstorming kind, you know? Some outside the box thinking ...

So far for my intentions. Well ment is most of the time the opposite of well done, I guess

[rwhitby]

It is a difficult time for us WebOS affiliates. And my question was: what more can we do?

That is the question for which I do not have an answer, other than the three items I originally posted.

-- Rod