[manordwall]

Considering that webOS 2.0.1 is in many ways several steps back from webOS 1.4.5, other than ofcourse stacks and flash, I don't understand why everyone is so upset about not getting webOS 2.xx. I for one am actually quite happy to not have my Pre+ burdened with the laggy, slow and limited webOS 2.xx.

Can some one please tell me:
1. Why my Pre + (600mhz cpu) with webOS 1.4.5 can do a complete restart in 3 & 1/2 minutes, whereas my Pre 2 (1Ghz cpu) with webOS 2.0.1 takes a whole 5 & 1/2 minutes to do the same?
2. Why with the Pre+ webOS 1.4.5, I have never ever faced any issues syncing data with the various cloud accounts, whereas with webOS 2.0.1 it is almost impossible to do the same without trying numerous times?

I really can go on and on about the long list of things I prefer webOS 1.4.5 for over webOS 2.0.1.

Im going to correct you on a few guesses about 2.0. I have it on my Sprint pre.

1. My 2.0 sprint pre does a full restart in 2 minutes.

2. My accounts and everything synced just fine onto 2.0. Absolutely nothing wrong with it.

I'm not sure how you came to those results but I think you are near alone with them.

[ToniCipriani]

I got a reply from o2 (UK):

Hello Steven

The current software update available for Palm Pre is 1.4.5. We can't
say when the WebOS 2 update will available or whether Palm Pre customers
be given a complimentary Pre Plus to receive updates. For the latest
software updates, please keep a tab on our website by clicking on:

O2 | Mobile Phones, Broadband & Sims From The UK's Leading Provider

To check if you can get an early upgrade to a phone supporting the WebOS
2 software update, please call our Upgrades team on 202 (free from any
O2 Pay Monthly mobile) or on 0800 1313 136 (free from all landlines)
from 8am to 8pm on weekdays and 8am to 6pm on weekends.

I hope things get sorted for you. If you have any further questions,
please feel free to reply to this email or visit our online Help Centre
at:

Support - O2

Regards

Vishnu
O2 Customer Service

This caught my eye. I wonder why they specifically mention the Pre Plus to be updated. This is coincidental with the webos-info page saying the Pre Plus might be getting the update

If the O2 Pre Plus can get the update, why can't the Verizon and AT&T units get it? I thought the only difference is the modem. Same goes for Sprint and Bell Pre Classic, the difference is the modem and RAM?

[rwhitby]

If the O2 Pre Plus can get the update, why can't the Verizon and AT&T units get it? I thought the only difference is the modem. Same goes for Sprint and Bell Pre Classic, the difference is the modem and RAM?

Well, the other major difference is the carrier, with whom both subsidised hardware customers and Palm have a contract ... and the carriers in the US seem to be the ones that call the shots on these things.

-- Rod

[Volcom45]

To those of you I see mentioning you are running 2.0 on Sprint, have you found a way to add new bookmarks or launcher shortcuts to webpages?

[Brain_ReCall]

That said, I read with interest some of Lisa Brewster's (Developer Relations Administrator at Palm) responses on Ed Finkler's (author of Spaz) blog site.

Thanks for pointing to that. Here's a quote I found interesting:

OK, I’m going to break my NDA, a secret promise, since Palm broke their highly-advertised promise.
I was on the webOS 2.1 beta on current devices, and things were coming along fine. There were a few bugs, as is normal for software development and they were being hammered out, but MY Pre plus was operating as a whole much more smoothly than it is now on 1.4.5. Suddenly and without warning, late last month the beta was pulled and we were told to doctor back to 1.4.5 and trash our old builds—never to speak of this again.

I've read on other sources that the principle reason the OTA update could not be accomplished was that the OS partition was too small and would need to be resized to fit the update. Resizing the partitions on the device would have erased all data, and trying to push that as on OTA update would have been a support nightmare. I suspect the carriers were not willing to take such a support burden for such a small user base on such old hardware.

Edit: Doctor's also have to be approved by the carrier, since they will still be stuck with the support. They likely don't want to bother with that either.

[COS777]

here is what i hope will happen -

By next monday they will come out and say that they will give a pre 2 to all pre +/- users in exchange for their old phone. Hopefully for free, but i dont think its likely. Maybe we would pay $50. Since the pre3 is already coming out, they should have a fairly large inventory of the, now old, pre 2's.

I'm hoping the same thing, but I would be surprised if it actually happens. For $50 and no contract, I think it would be worth it. You could still get the Pre 3 on a new contract when it comes out and have the Pre 2 as a spare.

[Cantaffordit]

Thanks for pointing to that. Here's a quote I found interesting:


I've read on other sources that the principle reason the OTA update could not be accomplished was that the OS partition was too small and would need to be resized to fit the update. Resizing the partitions on the device would have erased all data, and trying to push that as on OTA update would have been a support nightmare. I suspect the carriers were not willing to take such a support burden for such a small user base on such old hardware.

Edit: Doctor's also have to be approved by the carrier, since they will still be stuck with the support. They likely don't want to bother with that either.

Where did you find that quote?

[Cantaffordit]

Thanks for pointing to that. Here's a quote I found interesting:


I've read on other sources that the principle reason the OTA update could not be accomplished was that the OS partition was too small and would need to be resized to fit the update. Resizing the partitions on the device would have erased all data, and trying to push that as on OTA update would have been a support nightmare. I suspect the carriers were not willing to take such a support burden for such a small user base on such old hardware.

Edit: Doctor's also have to be approved by the carrier, since they will still be stuck with the support. They likely don't want to bother with that either.

Where did you find that quote?

OK, I’m going to break my NDA, a secret promise, since Palm broke their highly-advertised promise.
I was on the webOS 2.1 beta on current devices, and things were coming along fine. There were a few bugs, as is normal for software development and they were being hammered out, but MY Pre plus was operating as a whole much more smoothly than it is now on 1.4.5. Suddenly and without warning, late last month the beta was pulled and we were told to doctor back to 1.4.5 and trash our old builds—never to speak of this again.

[Bullroarer Took]

I just don't see HP doing that, regardless of how much sense it might make for the short term. HP is a huge company that thinks long term. Early adopters are the ants that the elephant doesn't see. I really expecting no more than a token gesture, and that is probably happening more to keep the internal Palm people happy than us.

[Brain_ReCall]

Where did you find that quote?

This post from the blog hparsons linked: http://funkatron.com/site/comments/t...os-event/#7509


Also, the info on the oversized update came from here: Making the Case: Why HP isn’t allowing OTA updates (and why we think it’s a good thing) | webOSroundup

[hparsons]

Thanks for pointing to that. Here's a quote I found interesting:

I too found "John Doe's" post interesting, for a number of reasons, but I'll focus on one:

To lie to the public and say that it “cannot support webOS 2” is disingenuous at best and flat-out lying at its worst...

Followed later, in the same post, by this:

...Lisa, unless Palm speaks and SPEAKS NOW, it’s over and done for me. This Pre plus will magically wind up in a cup and I’ll walk back to BlackBerry with an insurance replacement. At least RIM still supports THEIR “legacy” devices for a few years.

I'm going to ignore the guy breaking his NDA, and point out the inconsistency in the above two statements.
In the former, he's upset with Palm for either being disingenuous, or flat out lying, and then he follows it up with his vow to commit insurance fraud.

So, the theif is upset that he got lied to.

Interesting, to say the least.

[hparsons]

Where did you find that quote?

Go to the article, - http://funkatron.com/site/comments/t...d-webos-event/ - about halfway down the page, it's under "John Doe"

[ekuns]

Snippet 1:

So, while I'm waiting I can act like a jerk and rant and rave about how I've been "lied to", and claim that I'm leaving never to return again, and all that other stuff that basically really sounds more like a jr high "couples" break-up than anything else (and really probably holds about the same permanency and maturity level as those did).

However, if I do that, and Lisa/Adora's comments hold water and HP offers something really compelling, I'd look like a jerk when I came crawling back, and deservedly so (I really wonder how many of the sudden-HP/Palm-haters were the same guys that had to scrub hate-messages about ex-ex-girlfriends on the boys bathroom wall).

Snippet 2:

It doesn't hurt that Lisa/Adora is easy on the eyes, interesting to read, has never lied to me, and is every geek guy's fantasy - a good looking girl that knows technology

These two bits out of your post give me cognitive dissonance, the first talking about teenage couples and angry post-breakup bathroom scribblings, the second seemingly conflating the honesty and the attractiveness of a Dev Relations person from Palm. I agree with you in that 1) I believe that she speaks the sincere truth as she knows it, and 2) I believe that she's deeply committed to the development environment and to empowering developers. However, for me, her personal appearance is not part of this equation. I follow her on twitter not from infatuation, but because she and the several other Palm employees I follow provide interesting information and commentary.

Changing gears, so far as I'm concerned, each person gets to make the choice to stay or go based on their own private criteria, whether those criteria make sense to me or not. I'm not going to tell anyone that they're stupid for leaving. I'm not going to tell anyone that they're stupid for staying. After all, a smartphone is just a very useful tool. There is, IMHO, no invalid reason for deciding to change models or manufacturers.

What I see as a problem for Palm/HP is that many, many people are leaving right now, and that's a reality that HP needs to face. Even if people are leaving for stupid reasons, it's still a reality that HP needs to face, because this is doing (again IMHO) incalculable harm to the WebOS ecosystem.

It may be that HP and/or Jon Rubinstein has made a "business decision" that even if they lose all of the current users, they either don't care or feel like they had no better choice, and they believe that they can start with a total reset of the userbase and still bring WebOS to be a major player in the marketplace. In fact, I kind of suspect this is the case, and that some folks from Palm, who appreciate their sometimes fanatical fan base, are trying to do what is within their ability to make things right. The key phrase is "what is within their ability."

I've been sitting on an upgrade for six months. My Pre(-) is still working and it still mostly kind of meets my needs. I wouldn't burn an upgrade for a Pre2, even if it were available on Sprint. I would upgrade to a Pre2 for a nominal fee if I didn't have to burn an upgrade to do so. My Pre still works, but I seriously doubt it will last until the beginning of summer, let alone "summer" (which could be anywhere from May to early September -- if there are no delays and if it's released on Sprint in "summer"). I'm facing the reality that if my Pre dies, since I will not go without a smartphone for months to wait for another one which may or may not be released within a deliberately vague schedule, and since I won't (and anyway cannot) change carriers, I'll have little choice but to go to Android. No emotion is involved in this statement. It's just my reality. Your reality is different, and I respect that.

[StuntmanMark]

I just want to throw this out there to "John Doe" (though I'm not sure if he'd even read these forums): Rim does not support their legacy devices. Ask somebody who bought an 8530. They can't get Blackberry OS 6, and those phones were sold less than a 6 months ago.

-- Sent from my Palm Pre using Forums

[ekuns]

and then he follows it up with his vow to commit insurance fraud.

Yes, that is one person who is angry, who is willing to respond to company A being dishonest (in his opinion) by being just as dishonest to company B (his or her cell provider). I agree that this is hypocrisy, insurance fraud, and morally indefensible.

HOWEVER.

This one person being hypocritical in this regard does not mean that he or his is inaccurate about Palm's veracity. I agree with that person to the extent that when Palm / HP reps say that the Pre is too weak to support or incapable of supporting WebOS 2.0, we know this is factually untrue. On the other side, this does not mean that there are not other difficulties that made distributing 2.0 essentially unachievable. From the sum total of what we've heard from folks who ran 2.0 on a Pre (under NDA in a beta program or due to illicitly acquiring the 2.0 doctor), it sounds like performance was roughly the same as 1.4.5, but there were other significant technical difficulties, the biggest probably being the necessary reformat. In fact, for all we know, this one issue may have rendered an OTA 2.0 effectively impossible.

[Brain_ReCall]

So, the theif is upset that he got lied to.

I'm really confused as to why this is surprising or even relevant. Thieves can be upset about being lied to, just like anyone else and does nothing to argue against case presented. See: Straw man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If anything, labeling him a thief gives the idea of him breaking his NDA even more support. Or perhaps your willing to try to equate his comment about threat of isurance fraud (surely not proof) to insinuate that he is a liar about his NDA story? But, we know from other sources that there was a webOS 2.x beta, and it was pulled rather recently.

Still, none of what I'm saying is really going against HP. This is very likely to be the result of the carriers refusing to provide support, then Jon being forced to "fall on his sword" and announce the hardware was incapable. In that way he wouldn't anger the carriers by shifting blame to them.

[ekuns]

Why I'm staying is pretty simple.
My Contract - I'm a little more than 3 months away from completing a 2 year contract.

FYI: Many people on the data plans required of smart phone owners on Sprint are eligible for an upgrade once very 12 months (although this changes in a month or two), and the Sprint 2 year contract allows another fully subsidized upgrade after 22 months, not 24.

Thus, either you were eligible to upgrade nine months ago, or you only have one month to go before you can get the full subsidy again.

[Adora]

Sorry, isn't this the same lady that showed up a few months back, all interested in the incorrect and incomplete info on Palm's website regarding geo-restrictions of the AppCat?
The one that never checked back to see which info was correct, and did not get anything changed?

Yep, same lady.

Rod and I have discussed this issue at length, and I've reported it to the knowledge base team to have the article updated. Thanks for the reminder to check the status on it. =]

[drvon#AC]

So just watched the ndrive youtube video from MWC. The man was showing off a nav app on a pre plus running webos 2.0. It ran smooth as butter from what I saw. I think we are gettin screwed...

[hparsons]

... I follow her on twitter not from infatuation, but because she and the several other Palm employees I follow provide interesting information and commentary.

As Sgt Hulka said - "Lighten up Francis"
That said, you did notice that I said "it doesn't hurt", right?

In other words, all other things being equal - I don't mind saying I'd reather read up from a tech lady than the "PC guy" on the Mac commercials (who is really a Mac guy in real life).