[johna22]

I know the S4 is just coming out but anyone hear of any rumors about any plans for porting WebOS to run on it?

[Vistaus]

Sure. Samsung released all the source code, the drivers in source code and HP released everything related to webOS so a port is already in the works. [/sarcasm]

[johna22]

I know the chances are slim to nil, but being the eternal webos optimist that was one factor I considered when choosing the S4 over the Iphone 5, that maybe some day in the future, just maybe, I could load webos on it

Sure. Samsung released all the source code, the drivers in source code and HP released everything related to webOS so a port is already in the works. [/sarcasm]

[xandros9]

should've sprung for a Galaxy Nexus or Nexus 4, better chance there - but no guarantees, best webOS option right now is a native webOS device

[Remy X]

For as long as webOS continues to use its own hardware interface protocols and not Android's, a port to any new Android hardware is just a dream... The hardware accelerated graphics issue is one that is most apparent, but there's also a couple other stumbling blocks of similar nature...

[laoh]

I know the S4 is just coming out but anyone hear of any rumors about any plans for porting WebOS to run on it?

We're still waiting for the galaxy nexus port man.

[sledge007]

Sure. Samsung released all the source code, the drivers in source code and HP released everything related to webOS so a port is already in the works. [/sarcasm]

A simple "no" would have been sufficient. I can't say I find anything funny with your sarcasm. It's borderline rude, if you ask me and adds nothing to this thread.

[geekpeter]

A simple "no" would have been sufficient. I can't say I find anything funny with your sarcasm. It's borderline rude, if you ask me and adds nothing to this thread.

i "think" his sarcasm is directed at the manufacturers who claim their devices are fully open when typically theres always a stumbling block or 2.

[dignitary]

I know the chances are slim to nil, but being the eternal webos optimist that was one factor I considered when choosing the S4 over the Iphone 5, that maybe some day in the future, just maybe, I could load webos on it

As Rod Whitby of webOS Internals has said repeatedly, you shouldn't be buying phones for the sake of loading Open webOS on them.

Buy them because they're the most useful for you and it's the phone you want. Buying them because you think Open webOS is going to coming to them in a workable, "daily driver" form is a really bad bet you shouldn't be placing.

There's already several ports in progress and very few people in the community knowledgeable enough to actually do one decently, but until they get the video acceleration issue taken care of, you might as well consider each of them stalled until someone provides proof they've gotten through that (giant) hurdle.

[laoh]

A simple "no" would have been sufficient. I can't say I find anything funny with your sarcasm. It's borderline rude, if you ask me and adds nothing to this thread.

I got the sarcasm and didn't find it to be rude. What's the problem here. Right, there is none.

[sledge007]

i "think" his sarcasm is directed at the manufacturers who claim their devices are fully open when typically theres always a stumbling block or 2.

Oh did I miss the statement by Samsung saying that the S4 was fully open.... because I haven't heard of any such thing.
Generally, if someone is asking a question, I am assuming that it is a genuine question and they want a genuine answer.

Here's a couple of definitions of sarcasm :
1. A cutting, often ironic remark intended to wound.
2. A form of wit that is marked by the use of sarcastic language and is intended to make its victim the **** of contempt or ridicule.

It is generally considered to be the lowest (intellectually) form of humor. At any rate, it appears no harm, no foul.

[Greg Mair]

There's a 0% chance the Iphone will get webOS, There's a 0.1 chance that S4 will get OpenWeboS.

I'd take that .1% and get the S4. hahah.

[lansing]

Sure. Samsung released all the source code, the drivers in source code and HP released everything related to webOS so a port is already in the works. [/sarcasm]

I still have some confusion, in respect to HP and its' apparent lingering ties to webOS. If they sold the operation to LG, what exactly are they holding onto. And can HP affect Open webOS going forward. By that I mean, can they restrict certain issues (ie. drivers, etc.) that might move the project along.

In essence, is HP following one of 2 paths?
1) Sabotaging a faster development of webOS, or
2) Are they simply idiots, and don't give a f#@k about losing future Buyers of their products (by being obstinate with this whole situation).

In simple terms ..... is HP holding back webOS's future?

As I mentioned in a previous post, it would be nice to have some clarification (via a webosnation report/post) as to what LG can do, and can't do (besides host the Catalogue). And why would HP keep the Catalogue? When they shut it down (as some suggest), wouldn't that be more detrimental to their image (not that they've considered this before). And given that the senior editor of Verge just donated $7,500 to the webOS cause, along with the admirers of webOS amongst other technology Blogs, isn't HP walking on uncertain ground with this apparent apathy?

Reality is, the cost of staying the course is essentially peanuts to the (former?) #1 PC maker, versus the cost (and reputation) of going down in history - tagged as being the single biggest contributor to an great OS's demise? The latter being in respect to a commercially viable OS - pessimistic as that is.

.

[RumoredNow]

It is somewhat of a given that as each great new flagship Android device launches someone will ask if it is going to get Open webOS.

Next up will be the HTC One which is getting rave reviews...

I understand these questions are based on hope and not research. That's actually a good sign for the community. Apparently there is a subset of users that believe webOS can conquer anything.


For what it is worth... If any devices are going to be flexible - it is most likely the Nexus range. That's why I have the two latest Nexus phones. Research, practicality and hope in equal measures.

Without all the OEM skinning and Carrierware bloat - Android is much more pleasant than I remember from years past.

They are among the easiest devices to work with - even if it is just to make Android Mods.

Ubuntu Touch will definitely be flashable to both the GNex and the N4 when the first consumer edition is released.

WebOS Ports is definitely working on porting Open webOS (no promises of success) to the Galaxy Nexus.

LG purchased legacy webOS, has become involved in Open webOS and is the OEM of the Nexus 4. There is still the somewhat insane hope that they might bring webOS in some form to the Nexus 4 after the Nexus 5 is launched and Google is no longer looking to the N4 as a standard.

[chalx]

I still have some confusion, in respect to HP and its' apparent lingering ties to webOS. If they sold the operation to LG, what exactly are they holding onto. And can HP affect Open webOS going forward. .

Same thing here, I'm also confused, especially after Rod's comments related to absence of any interest in Open webOS from HP and how WebOS ports opened communications channel with LG.
Are there any new commits from HP employees to open webOS on github ? Are there any commits from LG employees to open webOS on github ?
really confusing

[Herrie]

Same thing here, I'm also confused, especially after Rod's comments related to absence of any interest in Open webOS from HP and how WebOS ports opened communications channel with LG.
Are there any new commits from HP employees to open webOS on github ? Are there any commits from LG employees to open webOS on github ?
really confusing

Updates on (public) GitHub from LG have become more rare the last couple of weeks It could be they're doing a lot of things internally that haven't been pushed yet, but the slow progress doesn't make me happy.

Commitments from back in November & December still haven't been met.....

November:

Qt5/WebKit2 Upgrade for SysMgr Components Project

Early in December we will begin the complex process of updating the following SysMgr components from Qt4.8/WebKit1 to be based on Qt5/WebKit2 and we expect to complete the process by the end of that month: “luna-sysmgr”, “luna-sysmgr-common”, “keyboard-efigs”, “smartkey-hun” and “webappmanager”.

We expect the bulk of the effort will be related to supporting Qt5 in the build system, updating the QPAs to work with Qt5, and of modifying “luna-sysmgr” and “webappmanager” to convert deprecated Qt4.8 capabilities to their Qt5 equivalents.

Once the WebAppManager Separation Project has reached a stable point early in December, and the “unstable” branch of “luna-sysmgr” has again been rolled up into the “master” branch, you will begin seeing the Qt5 conversion work appearing in the “unstable” branches of these five components.

December:

This month we completed and delivered the pluggable keyboard project, WebAppMgr separation and upgrading to Qt 4.8.3. Work continues as planned on upgrading Qt5/webkit2 (more details next month). Also, the complete rewrite of mediaServer has been completed and is now undergoing internal QA testing, look for this to hit the repos in the coming weeks.

QT5 still isn't there, MediaServer still hasn't been released.

No proper update to the blog with regards to progress since December. I'm really disappointed in the progress from both HP and LG towards the Open Source project.

WebOS Ports on the other hand has been working their collective *ss off though and tons of commits are being made daily!

[kevets]

There's a 0% chance the Iphone will get webOS, There's a 0.1 chance that S4 will get OpenWeboS.

I'd take that .1% and get the S4. hahah.

[YT]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMRrNY0pxfM[/YT]

[ewl88]

I still have some confusion, in respect to HP and its' apparent lingering ties to webOS. If they sold the operation to LG, what exactly are they holding onto. And can HP affect Open webOS going forward. By that I mean, can they restrict certain issues (ie. drivers, etc.) that might move the project along.

In essence, is HP following one of 2 paths?
1) Sabotaging a faster development of webOS, or
2) Are they simply idiots, and don't give a f#@k about losing future Buyers of their products (by being obstinate with this whole situation).

In simple terms ..... is HP holding back webOS's future?

As I mentioned in a previous post, it would be nice to have some clarification (via a webosnation report/post) as to what LG can do, and can't do (besides host the Catalogue). And why would HP keep the Catalogue? When they shut it down (as some suggest), wouldn't that be more detrimental to their image (not that they've considered this before). And given that the senior editor of Verge just donated $7,500 to the webOS cause, along with the admirers of webOS amongst other technology Blogs, isn't HP walking on uncertain ground with this apparent apathy?

Reality is, the cost of staying the course is essentially peanuts to the (former?) #1 PC maker, versus the cost (and reputation) of going down in history - tagged as being the single biggest contributor to an great OS's demise? The latter being in respect to a commercially viable OS - pessimistic as that is.

.

Yes, I too am confused by HP's inability to completely separate from LG, new owner of webOS. The only way I can rationalize this is HP does the cloud stuff related to webOS including catalog and LG handle the hardware which at this point is smart TVs. HP is keeping the door open to webOS and has become the silent/more silent partner to LG. Maybe HP will host the online video, apps for LG webOS based smart tvs with HPs server farms. I wish LG would let some information out. The webOS group is still tweeting about enyo meetings but I havent seen the monthly updates on open webOS development.
But at least there wasn't a mass layoff and Jason Robitaille was rehired as LG enyo team intern.

[Remy X]

[...] given that the senior editor of Verge just donated $7,500 to the webOS cause, along with the admirers of webOS amongst other technology Blogs, isn't HP walking on uncertain ground with this apparent apathy?

[...]

Hey, that was somebody's joke. The donation has actually been made by cuspie, one of the lesser known members of this forum

[Vistaus]

I still have some confusion, in respect to HP and its' apparent lingering ties to webOS. If they sold the operation to LG, what exactly are they holding onto. And can HP affect Open webOS going forward. By that I mean, can they restrict certain issues (ie. drivers, etc.) that might move the project along.

In essence, is HP following one of 2 paths?
1) Sabotaging a faster development of webOS, or
2) Are they simply idiots, and don't give a f#@k about losing future Buyers of their products (by being obstinate with this whole situation).

In simple terms ..... is HP holding back webOS's future?

As I mentioned in a previous post, it would be nice to have some clarification (via a webosnation report/post) as to what LG can do, and can't do (besides host the Catalogue). And why would HP keep the Catalogue? When they shut it down (as some suggest), wouldn't that be more detrimental to their image (not that they've considered this before). And given that the senior editor of Verge just donated $7,500 to the webOS cause, along with the admirers of webOS amongst other technology Blogs, isn't HP walking on uncertain ground with this apparent apathy?

Reality is, the cost of staying the course is essentially peanuts to the (former?) #1 PC maker, versus the cost (and reputation) of going down in history - tagged as being the single biggest contributor to an great OS's demise? The latter being in respect to a commercially viable OS - pessimistic as that is.

.

It seems kinda weird to me that HP will shut down the App Catalog. If they'd do, then what are they going to provide with their planned OWO Pro license? Only Synergy? Doesn't seem viable to me. If they really wanna license OWO Pro then they need an App Catalog for sure.