[ohiomoto]

As an operating system, webOS is not a failure at all. As a mobile OS, it's still the best in terms of how it interacts with it's users. But as a consumer product, it has failed. Palm couldn't deliver the hardware, the marketing or the ecosystem. HP put all their resources into the Touchpad and had unrealistic expectations for it when they should have focused on bringing some killer phones to market first. Tablets are the rage now, but phones are what people use and upgrade every day.

The reason webOS has struggled is because they were late to the party and didn't have the hardware and marketing to be noticed. Apple put the iPhone out in 2007, Android released its first phone late 2008 and Blackberry was still the king of the hill. These phones were all the rage when the the Pre came out on Sprint in mid 2009. Many uses were already under contract with their first smartphone (iPhone or Droid) or using a Blackberry. The rest of us weren't sure what we wanted and based on weak marketing and hardware reviews, Palm was low on the list. (I was ultimately swayed but the free mobile hotspot on the Pre Plus.)

If Palm had been able to release hardware at 1/2 the rate of Android and market it 1/2 as good as apple, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Put webOS on a piece of great hardware and market it properly and it would have gained ground at a steady rate. Sadly, the window for that to happen may be slamming shut now that Android has it's Matias Duart inspired Ice Cream Sandwich release on the horizon. While ICS is not webOS, it's a big leap in that direction and it will likely keep improving.

The question now is can webOS survive? HP may have blown it by not releasing new phones. (The Veer doesn't count because it's not in vogue and only available on At&T and the Pre 3 probably wouldn't have been enough without another device in the wings.)

[Mikey47]

If Palm had been able to release hardware at 1/2 the rate of Android and market it 1/2 as good as apple, we wouldn't be having this discussion."

The problem with this statement is that there are so many Android manufacturers that to meet that goal they would have had to put out devices 8 times faster than the fastest android manufacturer.

[joen05]

If Palm had been able to release hardware at 1/2 the rate of Android and market it 1/2 as good as apple, we wouldn't be having this discussion."

The problem with this statement is that there are so many Android manufacturers that to meet that goal they would have had to put out devices 8 times faster than the fastest android manufacturer.

I'm not completely convinced by this. Marketed properly, and with proper design, you don't need that many devices per year to be successful. Apple has proved this. Now I know that HP/Palm never was, and never could be Apple, but I believe that with 3-4 compelling devices per year, they could have firmly planted themselves at 3, which they then could have scaled by moving the OS to computers. Imagine being able to touch to share with your computer, mobile phone, and tablet? webOS could have connected one's entire digital life if developed properly.

The problem is that none of this happened. Missed deadlines and lackluster hardware have put webOS where it is now. Is it too late to recover? Maybe. But whoever may be interested needs to realize that they will not be shooting to be #1 out of the gate. It's a long battle, build a base, and then scale properly. The question remains as to whether anyone would want to do this.

[mmm5288]

the only way webOS is to survive is if someone is willing to put a lot of money into pumping out some new devices and advertise as much as iOS and android put together. While they are doing that they need to make deals with all the top 100 developers from the other two. I have no idea how much this would cost but I'm guessing in the billions. I don't really care who own webOS as long as they are willing to put time and money into it.

[netwrkr9]

Is webOS a failure? No, HP is a failure.

[bobsentell]

Hard to say. We are a society that is very oligarchic. We put our support in very few individuals. We have Ford, GM, and Toyota. We have AT&T, Verizon, and to a degree Sprint. We have Windows and Mac. We have Republicans and Democrats. In almost every aspect of your life there is a difference in the two or three "haves" and the several "haves not."

In the mobile space the players are iOS, Android (for as long as it exists), WP7, BlackBerry, and webOS. The main battle is between iOS and Android while the rest struggle for third and Microsoft's capital gives it a bit of a huge leg up in that regard. Given the capitalization of the platforms, it was always going to end up as a battle between WP7 and iOS even if it does take MS a little longer than it should. webOS failed the moment it allowed Android to become the third alternative. We as a consuming society just don't have a lot of need for a fourth alternative.

[shadavis08]

The only failure was the execution that HP did not think about before they did it !

[fxspec06]

The only failure was the execution that HP did not think about before they did it !

Yep! It's like dating that girl that you never really wanted to date, then after buying her a ring and a condo in the mountains, realizing she's trash and dumping her on the side of the highway.

DISCLAIMER: This has not actually happened to me

[ohiomoto]

If Palm had been able to release hardware at 1/2 the rate of Android and market it 1/2 as good as apple, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

The problem with this statement is that there are so many Android manufacturers that to meet that goal they would have had to put out devices 8 times faster than the fastest android manufacturer.

LOL, yeah, this is true so just pick any Android manufacture. Let's just say had they been able to release at least ONE new/competitive device a year.

I'm not completely convinced by this. Marketed properly, and with proper design, you don't need that many devices per year to be successful. Apple has proved this. Now I know that HP/Palm never was, and never could be Apple, but I believe that with 3-4 compelling devices per year, they could have firmly planted themselves at 3, which they then could have scaled by moving the OS to computers. Imagine being able to touch to share with your computer, mobile phone, and tablet? webOS could have connected one's entire digital life if developed properly.

The problem is that none of this happened. Missed deadlines and lackluster hardware have put webOS where it is now. Is it too late to recover? Maybe. But whoever may be interested needs to realize that they will not be shooting to be #1 out of the gate. It's a long battle, build a base, and then scale properly. The question remains as to whether anyone would want to do this.

Agree with everything you said. Pretty much my thoughts exactly. I think it still could happen because webOS really has that much potential, but the wheels need to be put in motion very soon because Android and Windows phones are starting to close the gap.

EDIT:
Looks like we aren't the only ones to feel this way either. http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-201...ng-webos-back/

[ohiomoto]

The only failure was the execution that HP did not think about before they did it !

I agree. HP had a chance to do great things with webOS and failed big time, but Palm blew it too. I'll forgive them for the lack of capital, but their marketing sucked and the Pre series wasn't known for it's quality. Then after 2 long years, the best they could do was the Pre 2? That strategy may work in the auto industry, but not in mobile space. Maybe Palm couldn't afford to do more than that, but they needed to. Also keep in mind, Palm was developing the Pre 3 and Veer when HP purchased them. Again, they are fine phones but not even close to what's in vogue these days. The really needed a new platform.

[dbodner]

HP never seemed to have an interest in webOS on smartphones. The Pre 2 was already in development when they purchased it, and they canceled webOS support before the Pre 3 was ever in the states. To me, smartphones was where they had the biggest dent to make. Where cards and just type had its most value, and where the market was more open to non-apple alternatives. it's a shame they hinged the entire OS on tablets.

[jdale]

LOL, yeah, this is true so just pick any Android manufacture. Let's just say had they been able to release at least ONE new/competitive device a year.

They certainly could have done that. The problem was they tried to release 5 (Veer, Pre3, slab phone, Touchpad, and Touchpad Go), and it was too much to coordinate, they were tripping over themselves. If they hadn't been so unfocused, the Pre3 and Touchpad could have been released earlier and tested properly.

[joen05]

They certainly could have done that. The problem was they tried to release 5 (Veer, Pre3, slab phone, Touchpad, and Touchpad Go), and it was too much to coordinate, they were tripping over themselves. If they hadn't been so unfocused, the Pre3 and Touchpad could have been released earlier and tested properly.

I don't think 5 was too many. That family of devices would have been perfect if they could have met deadlines. The Think Beyond even was the right direction, but the devices should have been released within a month instead of 6 months. The demand was there (at the time), HP just did not capitalize.

[RSantiago2003]

Poor Execution and release of hardware really killed HP's chances had Pre3, Veer and Touchpad all been released at the same time and with a much lower price it would've stand a chance at least to keep the fire going but unfortunately they blew it

[VanFred]

I think it depends on your own personal definition of failure? In a consumer society, it is not the worth or usability of a product that determines success or failure. For me it is often about survival in the market place.

[jdale]

I don't think 5 was too many. That family of devices would have been perfect if they could have met deadlines. The Think Beyond even was the right direction, but the devices should have been released within a month instead of 6 months. The demand was there (at the time), HP just did not capitalize.

I don't know that it would have been a failure in the marketplace if they had all been released properly.

In practice, though, they didn't have the resources allocated to complete all of those projects. They wasted man-hours working on the slab that delayed the release of the Pre3, for example. If the Pre3 had come out in July, who knows who this would have played out? Could have been different. So it was too many for HP to successfully complete.

[donm527]

i'm always gonna say... the failure was before hp... it was with palm and ruby failing in execution. he couldnt put it together. he couldnt keep up with the changes in tech. the phone would have been head to head with the iphone 2g if there were no apps and only webapps. he couldnt keep up with the rise in apps. he kept playing with itunes. he was a total failure and hp made a huge mistake in having him run webos with hp... they were fooled at the state of webos coming into hp and with him still running it he kept his fooling him hoping he'd have enough time to have a real competitor to market.

enough time passes by and people look back... it will be looked at a fail.

The only failure was the execution that HP did not think about before they did it !

[joen05]

I don't know that it would have been a failure in the marketplace if they had all been released properly.

In practice, though, they didn't have the resources allocated to complete all of those projects. They wasted man-hours working on the slab that delayed the release of the Pre3, for example. If the Pre3 had come out in July, who knows who this would have played out? Could have been different. So it was too many for HP to successfully complete.

Right. I think that the family of devices introduced at that event: the TouchPad, the Pre3 and the Veer should have been brought to market immediately after the event. They then could have finshed up work on their slab devices and brought that to market later in the year. The Pre3 and the TouchPad were meant to work together; they should have been released together.

[nimra]

Palm failed long before webOS - they would have had a chance to make up their liability just at the time the first iOS phone was released - in terms of better and bigger screens, wifi, webbrowser and for sake once a real good camera - they brought so little advances on their Treo's in those YEARS after they had bought Handspring - this is their liability. IF they'd come out with webOS and a really decent HW including support for all the Palm Apps (not like with an app like classic, but integrated) that were already there ! ...they could have been Nr. 1,2,3 ...
BUT perhaps, if they would have done that, they would have stoped the whole dynamic of the iphone - which acutally made smartphones available too the broad public...and again all would have been different...
HP bought a long term liability and did not see, realize and handle properly ... those guys even now need to put 100 people together to find out, that departing from the whole HW business would cost relations - ships and drive business down (and for sure shareholder values) - sorry but I cannot think with that - so blind and stupid ! this is a market too much depending on share values and the hope for fast money and there the psychoticness enters.
...and still I love my Pre3 ;-)

[smooth3006]

webos didn't fail, both palm & hp did. back in 2009 before android became the monster it is today it could of been a real competitor. now?... it's going to be a tough sell.

SO no webos was never a fail, the companies backing it were. also don't forget back in 2009 hardware was no where near what it is today.

all these companies have done is let us down and im tired of it. i commend each and every one of you that have loyally stuck with this platform, even up until the end.