Quote Originally Posted by jhoff80 View Post
I just updated my post with more on how the licensing went, but basically licensing is arguably the cause of Palm's near financial ruin before webOS was even announced.

Even now, I'm not sure that licensing helps. I mean, Palm's biggest issues are financial as it is. Google's Android is entirely free for companies to license (and I've read some companies are even possibly getting a cut of the advertising revenue). Despite my thinking webOS is superior, it's a hard argument to pitch to a hardware company to license a less popular OS that they have to pay for, versus a much more popular OS that is free.

And even if they did convince a company to do that, I highly doubt licensing fees and app sales are enough to keep Palm afloat.

I mean, the reason everyone wants HTC to license webOS is because they are said to make superior devices, right? Well, if that's the case, who would be buying from Palm? (Similar to the Sony Clie days, where Palm was getting absolutely destroyed on the hardware side by Sony).

If they're not selling as many phones, they have to rely on the licensing fees, and I just don't think that would be enough to sustain the company. It wasn't enough for PalmSource, for example.
thanks for the quick reply.

first I think palms management of os lisencing in the past is instructive for the future as it illustrates avoidable pitfalls. Making hardware and software and lisencing that need not always compete. Palm has opporunities like (thrown out half heartedly) the emerging tablet market where webos might shine as a lisenced os.

theidea of looking in the past is similar to looking at other businesses who become absorbed. I had a compaq laptop which hp continued supporting after they were bought (obvious difference is obvious) whatever happens to palm I am less concerned that webos will survive and be updated, than I am about our backup and sync solutions.

now I'm off on a tangent, I should sleep.