MobileInfocenter

Comments on: Rumor: HTC to Build Palm Windows Mobile Treo

Palm Treo 670 smartphone running windows mobile 2005According to a report from DigiTimes, the Chinese newspaper Commercial Times claims Taiwan-based High Tech Computer (HTC) will produce Palm's next generation Treo series smartphones including one using Microsoft's Windows Mobile operating system. Production is said to begin in the first quarter of next year.
Return to Story - Permalink

Article Comments

 (160 comments)

The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. PalmInfocenter is not responsible for them in any way.
Please Login or register here to add your comments.

Start a new Comment Down

WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?

Gekko @ 8/11/2005 3:50:35 PM # Q

*IF* the imminent realease of a WinMob Palm is TRUE -

1. Will it lead to the eventual end of any NEW PalmOS devices by any real licensee - including Palm?

2. Will it lead to the eventual death of Palm (the hardware company) in the long run?



RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
ardiri @ 8/11/2005 4:04:19 PM # Q
1. Will it lead to the eventual end of any NEW PalmOS devices by any real licensee - including Palm?

no; i dont think so. i have been waiting for this to happen.

the hardware that windows mobile and palm os support have converged over the past few years - one could argue that even symbian is using the same hardware (ARM, color screen). the difference between the platforms are screen resolution, and the input mechanisms - at a hardware level.

software; is just software.

2. Will it lead to the eventual death of Palm (the hardware company) in the long run?

why would it lead to the eventual death of Palm? if anything; Palm, as a company are now supporting two software platforms - which, offer different functionality and as such definately appeal to seperate markets.

if anything; Palm doing a Palm OS and Windows Mobile device just expanded their market share - which, is a good thing. we have seen that the battle over the past few years has seen the market share equalize between the two software platforms.

the thing is; i bet this phone only has a 240x240 display; like the PPC-6700 devices that HTC are manufacturing (check engadget et al for these specs). the two devices dont vary much in regards to specifications. a Palm OS device still has the 320x320+ edge :P

---
Aaron Ardiri
PalmOS Certified Developer
aaron_ardiri@mobilewizardry.com
http://www.mobilewizardry.com/blog/ <-- check out my technology blog!

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
souterj @ 8/11/2005 4:05:36 PM # Q
Perhaps Palm are positioning themselves as a manufacturer that can offer handhelds irrespective of your OS preference.

If this is the case and they can manage to survive in the fierce WinMob market place - it might be a neat trick.

BUT - I think Palm need to focus on what you get in a 2005/2006 Palm PDA. I feel it should have excellent video codec support BUILT-IN for one. People just want to plop their video files on an SD card and play them, without all the painful transcoding that most Palm players currently need (assuming video footage is already at a sensible PDA-friendly resolution).

Also, isn't it about time that Palm encouraged/licensed a proper Flash player and PDF viewer (the official Adobe viewer is unforgivably crud, especially when used on higher-end Palms like the T3 - no 320x480 support).

Time moves on and so do people's needs, a flashy handheld with Personal Info Management apps that have barely changed in a decade don't cut it in late 2005. Palm need to re-evaluate what makes a gadget seem 'cool' to a wide spectrum of users and tap into that enthusiasm.

A Linux or WinMob OS handheld wont save Palm by itself - what is needed is the vision to bring more to the party, delivering a device that sets trends and excites its target audience like an iPod or a Blackberry.

I only planned to write 2 sentences - I must just have a lot of pent up frustration beginning to spew out about my favourite handheld platform and the uninspired way in which it has been steered the last few years.

Interested in everyone elses thoughts - this is a promising thread.

KultiVator

If the **** sticks... throw it!

A Mad But Focused Mind Let Loose On The Speedy Roads Of Greenest Rural Britain


RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
Gekko @ 8/11/2005 4:15:01 PM # Q
my repost once again answers "why?" -

palm is in a catch 22. if they stick with just FrankenGarnet, they stay on a soon to be deserted island while the rest of the free world moves forward on the Windows Mobile Cruise Ship. They will be out there all alone on the island. Not to mention FrankenGarnet's instability/bugginess and limited frozen feature set.

if palm uses Windows Mobile, then they become just another low-margin commodity maker of WM smartphones. can they really compete in that market given the size, resources, and economies of scale of the competition? in my opinion - if palm chooses WM, they will lose their raison d'être. palmos was what made palm products unique - what set them apart.

i hear all this talk of 4% market share is good enough for apple - it will be good enough for palm. The market for PCs is a different animal than smartphones - so this is apples vs. oranges. 4% of the PC market or automobile market might be OK, but 4% of a niche market is not. especially if that's the only/few products that palm sells! stop using this analogy, apologists.

right now, palm has virtually 100% of the palmos smartphone market. how will palm function when they get X% of the WM market?

And does Palm really have the resources to offer *both* PalmOS and WinMob indefinitely? Is this really possible given development/marketing/distribution/support/partner-relations costs vs. finite resources?



Treo-looked PPC phone
murf @ 8/11/2005 4:15:34 PM # Q
I guess that phone won't be made by Palm. There is not brand name on the phone. That means some manufacturer will make Treo-like phone.

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
neuron @ 8/11/2005 4:16:31 PM # Q
Looks like the treo 670 is true.

BTW, the 240*240 is not a problem at all. I have used HW6515 for a few hours with serveral my favorite programs installed, all perfect. Those diehard POS users won't buy treo 670 at all even the resolution is VGA. 320*320 is impossible for wm5. 480*480 is OK, but this resolution will bring much more imcompatibilty problem than 240*240, also consuming more power. So. 240*240 is still the best choice for PPC treo so far. Of cource, 240*320 will be perfect if they implement.

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
JarJar @ 8/11/2005 4:19:21 PM # Q
As many users have already pointed out, in the short term this is good for Palm and expands their reach into two different markets.

In the long term, Palm doesn't have the resources to properly support two platforms (They can barely finish their products on time with just the Palm OS. This won't get better with multiple OS's)

Also, Palm can't compete in the WinMob arena because they can't compete with DELL et al. The Win market is all about commoditization, low-profit, high volume. DELL can purchase components at prices that Palm does not have access. Nothing can overcome this. DELL has long term relationships with both hardware and software (MS) that allows them special treatment that Palm cannot get.

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
ardiri @ 8/11/2005 4:21:22 PM # Q
Time moves on and so do people's needs, a flashy handheld with Personal Info Management apps that have barely changed in a decade don't cut it in late 2005. Palm need to re-evaluate what makes a gadget seem 'cool' to a wide spectrum of users and tap into that enthusiasm.

i think; Palm already has woken up and seen what they need to do.

the fact is, most Palm users wont touch a Windows Mobile based device - and, it works the same way around. Palm providing a Windows Mobile device doesn't hurt the Palm users - if anything, external support will most likely be done on the software side by PalmSource and Microsoft; remember Palm is a hardware provider.

Those diehard POS users won't buy treo 670 at all even the resolution is VGA.

exactly.

hear all this talk of 4% market share is good enough for apple

you need to ask yourself why apple are now lookin at x86 for their processor market. there are a lot of PC based people who will switch to mac osx - providing it is a usable interface. if the mac osx interface was implemented on any of the linux distributions - we would see a lot more people not using Windows. the problem is, providing the support that users need to make this change - apple can do this; an open source project cannot.

---
Aaron Ardiri
PalmOS Certified Developer
aaron_ardiri@mobilewizardry.com
http://www.mobilewizardry.com/blog/ <-- check out my technology blog!

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
souterj @ 8/11/2005 4:23:18 PM # Q
Too early to make such a judgement. Often early samples don't include branding.

But this clearly looks like the next Treo to me.


KultiVator

If the sh*t sticks... throw it!

How can I be a road-warrior when my PDA's weaponry is rusting?

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
neuron @ 8/11/2005 4:26:14 PM # Q
Just found SYWARE officially annouced they will support WM5 treo in the near future.

* * * * *

Get Ready for Palm’s “Treo” to Use Windows Mobile with SYWARE’s Mobile Database and Application Development Software…All the Advantages of Windows Mobile and Microsoft, Without the Need to Learn or Use Visual Basic

SYWARE announced that it will provide a specific help desk for Palm OS users who will need to consider transitioning field PDA applications with the expected eventual transition to Windows Mobile. The help desk will go into action as soon as Palm OS officially releases a “Treo” version with Windows Mobile. Many current users of Palm OS will need to start preparing to move their existing or future applications to this new platform to continue to enhance their business mobility. SYWARE’s Visual CE Mobile Database and Application Development product and its integrated products for wireless synchronization and remote printing will allow this to take place without needing to hire new programmers to learn and use Visual Basic. SYWARE requires no programming to develop robust PDA applications on Windows Mobile PDAs.

SYWARE’s President Sy Danberg stated “We are preparing to establish support for Palm OS users who may be thinking about a future transition to Windows Mobile. In preparation for this, we are developing a special pricing and support package to assist Palm OS users who may be in need of developing or transferring handheld applications to support their business needs. Many of our customers utilizing our products have implemented field applications 50 times faster than using Visual Basic where as still retaining the integration with other .NET products and the significant advantage of the Microsoft Platform.”

This news follows a previous announcement that an international panel of industry experts, sponsored by Microsoft Germany and Pocket PC Magazine Germany, presented SYWARE with a “Best Database Software Award 2004.” SYWARE allows users in a wide variety of market sectors to mobilize business information between the enterprise and the field to rapidly convert PC or paper-based processes into fully mobile applications that can be deployed on any Microsoft Windows Mobile Pocket PC or Windows CE device. Business or user-specific data can be downloaded, collected, displayed, modified and automatically synchronized. SYWARE enables users to create feature-rich, easy-to-use database applications without programming.

To learn more about SYWARE, visit www.syware.com

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
Gekko @ 8/11/2005 4:29:31 PM # Q

>Time moves on and so do people's needs, a flashy handheld with Personal Info Management apps that have barely changed in a decade don't cut it in late 2005. Palm need to re-evaluate what makes a gadget seem 'cool' to a wide spectrum of users and tap into that enthusiasm.

I think you make a great point. But some apologists say, "Garnet outta be good enough for anybody - at least until 2009."



RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
hkklife @ 8/11/2005 4:30:40 PM # Q
240*240? Bah.
320*480 is the MINIMUM I will accept on ANY sort of movibe PDA-style device (smartphones included) nowadays priced over $200.

Otherwise, web browsing is an impossibly hopeless proposition. It's hard enough on 320*480--and exacerbated by the utter lack of a decent Palm OS WWW browser--and 320*320 is aggravatingly constrained. 240*240 would simply be nigh unusable. Though, I will confess that I've never actually used a WinMob "Square Screen" device.



RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
ardiri @ 8/11/2005 4:36:35 PM # Q
Otherwise, web browsing is an impossibly hopeless proposition

this is why we need opera on palmos :)

http://www.opera.com/products/mobile/smallscreen/

they have some cool ideas about how to re-present a website on a small display - but, yes, in general; unless the sites are designed for handheld use; you probably want at least 640x480 or.. i would prefer 1024x768 minimum :P thats why i use my laptop/desktop for surfing.

---
Aaron Ardiri
PalmOS Certified Developer
aaron_ardiri@mobilewizardry.com
http://www.mobilewizardry.com/blog/ <-- check out my technology blog!

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
hkklife @ 8/11/2005 4:41:39 PM # Q
According to Brighthand and/or Jeff Kirvin, Opera will never appear on Palm-powered devices because it's not possible/they don't want it to/no one in the user base cares to see it (pick any number of the above excuses).

AGAIN, the utterly baffling complacency of the developer community in regards to POS is a baaaad omen for the future of the platform, kiddies.

It all began in '02/'03 when you had a bunch (but not TONS) of legacy apps that had seen frequent tweaking under OS 3/4.x not be updated at all for OS5...or barely be updated to be OS5-compliant but no enhancements such as BT capabilities, 320*320 etc. As OS 5.2 got inherently more feature-packed (320*480 support, for one) fewer and fewer apps were updated to take advantage of the latest'n greatest. Now you're seeing tons of apps that were updated in '02 or '03 that don't work properly with the new units' DIA/hard button layouts/"Treo-style" button navigation etc etc etc.

Are they riding out the Garnet wave and waiting for Cobalt with bated breath? Nope. They've either given up entirely (content to milk their existing wares for as long as humanly possible), switchd over to WinMob or cell phone development or just gone out of business entirely.

Face it folks, at best the Palm OS is going to be relegated to a niche in the marketplace. At worst it'll be assimilated and disappear entirely within two to three years. Think not much can happen in three years? Look where we were three years ago in the POS & WinMob camps and how things have flip-flopped since then).

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
ardiri @ 8/11/2005 4:53:31 PM # Q
Opera will never appear on Palm-powered devices because it's not possible/they don't want it to/no one in the user base cares to see it

well, if they dont think its possible - they should contact me. i would be willing to port opera to palm os. it definately is possible; hell, they just released a j2me version! (opera mini)

---
Aaron Ardiri
PalmOS Certified Developer
aaron_ardiri@mobilewizardry.com
http://www.mobilewizardry.com/blog/ <-- check out my technology blog!

Things haven't been "equalized" for a long time.
sr4 @ 8/11/2005 5:03:36 PM # Q
Many Palm users are still under the impression that things are "Equal", that the numbers are simply the split between two equally capable platforms, and that its all a question of taste.

In reality the split is about 63% vs 37%. POS is already a minority OS, and Palm selling a WM device will make it only worse.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Browser_Wars.png

This graph illustrates the browser wars, which MS eventually won. POS is about 1999 level, clearly in decline, but not moribund yet. Funny that it was about the same time that Netscape looked toward the Open Source Community to save it. Shades of Palm Linux there, isn't it. Then web pages started showing up saying "Designed for IE", and it was Game Over

Hudson: Well that's great, that's just f*ing great man. Now what the f* are we supposed to do? We're in some real pretty sh*t now man... That's it man, game over man, game over! What the f* are we gonna do now? What are we gonna do?
Burke: Maybe we could build a fire, sing a couple of songs, huh? Why don't we try that?

Time to build a fire.....

Surur

CIOs don't get fired for using MS products, says Palm CFO
sr4 @ 8/11/2005 6:13:49 PM # Q
A senior Palm executive says his company could benefit from building a mobile computing device that runs on the Windows operating system made by once-bitter rival Microsoft.

In an interview, Palm Chief Financial Officer Andrew Brown said that building a Treo that runs on the mobile version of Windows might help the company woo corporate customers who have been reticent to buy its Palm OS-based gadgets.


CIOs don't get fired for using Microsoft products," Brown said, though he did not say whether Palm has such a product in the works.

Palm's money man says there are benefits to offering a Windows Mobile-based Treo, but is stopping short of confirming the maker will do so.

Despite that shared heritage with PalmSource, Brown described Palm as neutral to the operating system its devices use--and the types of e-mail servers to which they connect.

"The fact is we are Switzerland, whether it be over the e-mail server or the OS," Brown told CNET News.com last week after a presentation to financial analysts at an RBC Capital Markets conference in San Francisco.

Brown's comments come just as enthusiast sites are buzzing with photos and videos purporting to be a next-generation Treo running Windows Mobile on a Verizon-branded device. The company has been studying other operating systems, including Windows Mobile, for some time.

Charles Golvin, an analyst with Forrester Research, said that if the photos of a Windows Treo product making the rounds are authentic, the product should be reasonably close to shipping to carriers and could be in consumers' hands by the end of this year.

http://news.com.com/Making+the+case...29076&subj=news

Is Colligan still going to stop this madness?

Surur

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
cervezas @ 8/11/2005 6:28:31 PM # Q
You know, I understand why people are anxious about the Palm platform, but all this drama is around the release of a Treo with Windows Mobile seems to be way overblown. A Windows version of the Treo will be good for Palm Inc, first of all. But if it sells well it will do so in the comparatively small US smartphone market, not in the much much bigger global market where Palm OS needs to succeed. In Asia Linux phones are taking over and in Europe nothing seems to be able to stop the advance of Symbian--certainly not Windows Mobile. Look at the numbers: Microsoft is losing not gaining ground to Symbian and Linux in the smartphone market.

And after you consider the global market remember that PalmSource is now playing to a device market that is an order of magnitude larger than the smartphone market it plays in now. If their feature phone strategy succeeds, Palm OS may very well be the smaller part of their business.

Hard as it may be for Americans to accept, the mobile platform battle must be fought and won in Asia, not America. And hard as it may be for PIC-dwellers to accept it's probably not going to be won just in the smartphone/PDA arena either. PalmSource was right to tie its fortunes to Linux and also was smart to go after the feature phone market where MS cannot follow. If they execute reasonably well they will have given Palm OS a strong position in Asia and that will give them the position they need to compete elsewhere.

David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
www.pikesoft.com

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
bdholmes @ 8/11/2005 6:44:25 PM # Q
"Face it folks, at best the Palm OS is going to be relegated to a niche in the marketplace. At worst it'll be assimilated and disappear entirely within two to three years. Think not much can happen in three years? Look where we were three years ago in the POS & WinMob camps and how things have flip-flopped since then)."

Yep, three years ago the golden age of Palm was just coming to an end. For Palm's many customers who want a top notch personal organiser, Palm's last quality product was the M500. It was never updated. Instead of keeping the distinctive small form factor that was so successful, Palms became bigger and more power hungry with each new model and the differetiator between them and Windows devices - size and battery life, steadily dissappeared as unnecessary new features were added. Now what you are getting when you buy a new Palm is effectively a Windows Mobile emulator. It is no surprise to me that they have decided to end the charade and actually make the real thing in an upcoming product.

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
sr4 @ 8/11/2005 7:13:16 PM # Q
Whats the difference between the supposed "feature phones" and MS smartphones? MS PDA phones are actually very popular in the East, and their smartphones can be made cheap enough to be free on contract.

Palmsource may survive (but I don't think so) but they wont be making anything much related to Palm OS. In a feature phone with no access to user-installed apps the Protein API does not really matter, does it?

And if Palm only sells WM devices in two years, doe it really matter if Colligan is still in charge, and Jeff Hawkins is still around?

Currently, the only real OS with a mobile future is WM.

This of course excludes Linux or Symbian, but thats a battle for another day.

Surur

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
Gekko @ 8/11/2005 7:28:51 PM # Q

So now I'm in a conundrum. My mobile phone contract expires in November and I was planning on consolidating two devices into one and buying a Treo 650 (despite the tight 32MB RAM (~24 Usable)). At $400+, now I'm not sure if this is a wise investment given all this uncertainty. I want something that can take me into the future. I played briefly with the Samsung SCH-i730 with WM and it felt klunky. This sucks.



RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
twrock @ 8/11/2005 7:39:18 PM # Q
ardiri: you need to ask yourself why apple are now lookin at x86 for their processor market. there are a lot of PC based people who will switch to mac osx - providing it is a usable interface.
I've seen similar statements made by others, but I still don't get it. Why is the switch to x86 going to specifically cause people to switch? My interest in the Mac is bases on OS, bundled apps, and elegance of hardware design. (I am toying with an old iBook at the moment.) Why should I care if the "guts" are built on the x86 line?

if the mac osx interface was implemented on any of the linux distributions - we would see a lot more people not using Windows.
Do you mean that if it was implemented on Linux instead of BSD then more people would switch? Are you talking about developers switching? Maybe I'm just being slow again. I don't get it.

I'm still waiting for the mythical "color HandEra."

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
sr4 @ 8/11/2005 7:42:34 PM # Q

There's a huge pile of WM devices coming to market soon. You should probably ignore any Wm2003SE devices, as they have phone functionality basically just tacked on to the WM OS, whereas WM5 was basically an integration of the WM smartphone OS and pocketpc's.

For the executive e-mail junkie, there's the HP 6715. Keyboard, WM 5, WIFI G, bluetooth, GPS, Edge, small, light, thinnish. 240x240 screen :(
For the IT geek (or head honcho), the HTC Universal. WIFI, bluetooth, 3G, keyboard, VGA screen, 1.3 MPixel camera.
For the ex-palm OS user, the WM Treo 670. Familiar form factor, keyboard, bluetooth, edge, can use small form factor SDIO WIFI card.240x240 screen
For everyone else, the HTC Apache. qvga screen, slide-out landscape keyboard, WIFI, bluetooth, evdo.
Motorola Q . Smartphone, qvga 320x240, keyboard, fashionable and thin.
Also the Eten M600 is coming, and I'm sure a few also which I forgot.

So, a much wider selection on the WM side than just the Treo on the Palm side. All push capable with an exchange server. All can use Skype. All have proper file systems. Comes with the bluetooth HID driver built-in, so should work with any bluetooth keyboard (and ? mouse)

The Dark Side is going to get seriously compelling.

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
VampireLestat @ 8/11/2005 7:48:38 PM # Q
Surur,

You are wrong. Palm OS over Linux has a big futur. You even admit it yourself at the end of your post when you list Linux and Symbian as another battle for another day.

Mark my words, if Palm and Palm Source stick to the plan and execute well on Palm Linux, you are going to see an avalanch of developer support; and THAT means great programs, and THAT means a stronger Palm economy. Also, being Linux, that will also mean more open source projects for Palm and more freeware. That alone will be a great reason for consumers to buy Palm OS over Linux devices. And if they want programs with that little extra edge, they can buy any of the 20 000+ ones available.

It's about to get very exciting in the Palm world again. I am however upset that the Treo 670 with WM will rain on the parade. Anyways, let's wait and see, maybe the 670 will never materialize. *knock on wood*

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
sr4 @ 8/11/2005 7:57:01 PM # Q

My only problem with your assessment is the 2 year gap in between. Like Gekko, people will be needing to upgrade before then, and there will not be anything compelling on the POS side. By the time the uber-Palm OS comes out it may very well be irrelevant, not have any mindshare and have all the dedicated developers moved on to other areas.

Like I said, how many people use Netscape browser these days? Answer 0.75% Is AOL making any money on their billion dollar investment? And even the open source Firefox will take many years to get close to displacing IE.

Its a question of time, and POS has basically run out of it.

Surur

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
Altema @ 8/11/2005 8:21:31 PM # Q
"For Palm's many customers who want a top notch personal organiser, Palm's last quality product was the M500."

Not too sure about that one. The M500 was basicaly a Palm V with extra ram and an SD slot if you look at it from a functional viewpoint. The M515 was the same size (few hairs thicker), had 64MB RAM, and could match the battery life if you used it like the M500 (without the backlight). But, you also had the option to use a decent backlight if needed. The M500 backlight was useless in low light conditions. I know, I owned one.

But this thread is not about former glories. I think Palm is looking at trying to capitalize on customers that appreciate the Treo hardware, but don't buy one because they prefer Windows Mobile. No, that's not illegal ;)

True, they may undermine POS slightly, but look at the scenarios:

No WM Treo: POS user buys Treo, unsatisfied WM user may or may not buy Treo, satisfied WM user does not buy Treo.

POS and WM Treo: POS user buys Treo, unsatisfied WM buys Treo of choice, satisfied WM user buys Treo.


RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
VampireLestat @ 8/11/2005 8:38:54 PM # Q
I, all my friends and everyone where I work already uses FireFox. I am sure that trend is present worldwide.

The Netscape analogy is not a fair one. IE killed Netscape because MS made it part of the OS. Palm is not a single application, it is a whole OS.

When you really think about it, all it takes is a single hot device to change all of our analyses. The Tungsten X will have WiFi and will keep the T5's great design. If they add a few better things like a mic, a vibrating alarm, a pointier tipped stylus, and OLED screen etc, you will see people buy them en masse. I know I will.

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
sr4 @ 8/11/2005 8:50:27 PM # Q
Yet the upcoming Tungsten is not slated to have any of these things (accept maybe WIFI).

Most people feel Palm killed itself through slow development. They do not appear to be responding very aggressively to the threat, unless capitulating by adding WM5 IS an aggressive move.

Surur

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
VampireLestat @ 8/11/2005 9:05:31 PM # Q
Yep, you may be correct on the Tungsten X. The rumour pic of the TX shows that they didn't put in a LED and stuff, and its only 312mhz (that is going to be a killer for many T5 owners patiently waiting to upgrade --- sigh). The button color difference sucks. But this is just a prototype, let's hope they will ship a more complete product.

Palm is SO close to the perfect PDA. They need to throw in some fancy T3 style things on the T5. I truely hope someone over at Palm can see this and act quickly to improve the TX. Colligan said he was looking forward to reinvigorating the handheld line; well, the TX is part of the answer.

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
twrock @ 8/11/2005 10:08:38 PM # Q
When you really think about it, all it takes is a single hot device to change all of our analyses. The Tungsten X will have WiFi and will keep the T5's great design. If they add a few better things like a mic, a vibrating alarm, a pointier tipped stylus, and OLED screen etc, you will see people buy them en masse. I know I will.
I would buy one too. And I'd be so excited that I might even become an "early adopter" for the first time in my life. However, I fear even if the T7 arrives, Surur is right; it will lack the full feature set you mentioned. If that happens, then I really would wait for the unit to be heavily discounted before buying. There wouldn't be enough advantage over my current unit to pay top dollar for it.

I'm still waiting for the mythical "color HandEra."
RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
Gekko @ 8/12/2005 12:05:43 AM # Q
GET OPERA BROWSER FOR PALM OS NOW!!!
gfunkmagic @ 8/12/2005 4:14:46 AM # Q
>>>>>According to Brighthand and/or Jeff Kirvin, Opera will never appear on Palm-powered devices because it's not possible..

Jees, where the hell have you people been!!! Opera recently released a java version of their mobile browser and alot of users have already gotten the Opera Mini midlet to work on the Treo!!

http://mytreo.net/forum/index.php/topic,18865.0.html

http://mytreo.net/downloads/details-838.html?Opera_Mini

It actually works pretty well on my Treo 650, although a native palmos version would be preferable... :)

--------------------
Gaurav

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
AdamaDBrown @ 8/12/2005 4:36:01 AM # Q
Aaron Ardiri wrote:
well, if they dont think its possible - they should contact me. i would be willing to port opera to palm os. it definately is possible; hell, they just released a j2me version! (opera mini)

Opera's always been more interested in the phone market than handhelds. They've ported to WM Smartphone, Symbian, and now J2ME, but never PocketPC or Palm. Keep up the pressure! We're not happy until we can have Opera on every mobile device we own! LEAVE NO SURVIVORS!

Altema wrote:
The M515 was the same size (few hairs thicker), had 64MB RAM,

Eh... I think you mean 16 MB. ;)

David Beers wrote:
PalmSource was right to tie its fortunes to Linux and also was smart to go after the feature phone market where MS cannot follow.

What do you call the free Windows Smartphone models with 64 MB memory, application expandability, music/video, etcetera? In any event, what does it matter of something with the name PalmSource survives selling Linux based phone software in China? The Palm OS as we know it will have ceased to exist. The only way that it retains any meaning is in handhelds and high-end smartphones like the Treo, and those are only possible in the more wealthy countries of North America and Europe. (Obvious exceptions of Japan, Taiwan, and S Korea, but their markets are so dense it's almost impossible to gain access.)

RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
palmato @ 8/12/2005 5:14:09 AM # Q
The opera j2me browser is proxy based. All the formatting is done at opera servers. And that's why it fits into j2me phones which notoriously have problems with large, actually not small, applications.

--------------------------
Waiting for a TT successor
RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
hkklife @ 8/16/2005 3:26:48 PM # Q
gfunk, my comments was posted (AFAIK) PRIOR to you or foo making the "announcement" of the Opera j2me browser running under POS. I don't consider that "real" support of POS. Besides, Opera making a formal announcement about supporting POS (or even PPC) would do wonders as far as placing a marketing spin on *someone* having faith in not only the Palm platform at this stage of the game but to PDA-based Smartphones in general!

I almost pulled my hair out today trying to access some imoprtant info and having Blazer 4 stalling and being so mind-numbingly slow on my T5.



RE: WinMob Treo = Eventual Death of PalmOS and Palm, Inc.?
sr4 @ 8/16/2005 3:45:51 PM # Q
Are you only saying that because you know Opera has announced native support for WM PDA's?

Screen shots of Opera for Windows Mobile Pocket PCs
http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=42332&highlight=

Surur

Reply to this comment

Terrible terrible idea

T_W @ 8/11/2005 9:15:17 PM # Q
This is an *insane* decision. They want to compete against the cut-rate graybox PC manufacturers?

I mean what Microsoft competitor who surrendered has *ever* done well afterwoods?

This also has the great side effect of completely demotivating (if not kill off) the PalmOS ISV market.

If anyone from Palm is reading, you had better comfirm or deny this soon!

I guess another benefit of outsourcing all manufacturing to China is that all of your preproduction units and long term plans get leaked on the Internet months ahead of time.

RE: Terrible terrible idea
VampireLestat @ 8/11/2005 9:57:35 PM # Q
T W: I agree with you. It is an insane decision.

By the way, it is for all intents and purpose confirmed by Palm.

Breaking news

Published: August 11, 2005, 12:42 PM PDT
http://news.com.com/Making+the+case+for+Windows+on+Palm+devices/2100-1047_3-5829076.html

A senior Palm executive says his company could benefit from building a mobile computing device that runs on the Windows operating system made by once-bitter rival Microsoft.

In an interview, Palm Chief Financial Officer Andrew Brown said that building a Treo that runs on the mobile version of Windows might help the company woo corporate customers who have been reticent to buy its Palm OS-based gadgets.

RE: Terrible terrible idea
VampireLestat @ 8/11/2005 9:59:38 PM # Q
A friend just told me that if this Treo 670 is launched with WM, the first thing consumers will think is that Palm is admitting that "their" OS is inferior. And he is right.

Developers are not going to take this positively either.

I am not happy at all with these turn of events. BIG mistake by Palm in my opinion. They've made blunders before but this will be the biggest.

It has all the appearances of a panicked desperate decision.

They will try to mask it it with nice mumbo jumbo language that "consumers now have more choice", "carriers were demanding this", "we are OS agnostic", bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla

At the end of the day... you simply don't trust your product enough to assure your future prosperity. Rule #1 in economics... ENSURE CONFIDENCE IN THE ECONOMY.

RE: Terrible terrible idea
joad @ 8/11/2005 10:43:51 PM # Q
Well, now we know how Palm(One) dropped the ball on the upgrades for the Treo 650 after getting the 600 from Handspring... They were too busy figuring out the PR stunts and machinations in order to put Winmob onto their newly acquired hardware...

Oh well, now they can disappoint Windows addicts too with their weak hardware specs. Looks like Palm will dilute itself out of business, rather than make any bold moves to save itself. As the poster above said it - if they can't even get it together to release a debugged Treo 650, just imagine what a train wreck the WinMobile version will be.

..And if Winmobile 5 is like 4, 3, 2 and 1 (wince!)... then it's heading out of the station on 3 wheels already before Palm even touches it...

RE: Terrible terrible idea
T_W @ 8/11/2005 10:57:26 PM # Q
>A senior Palm executive says his company could benefit from
>building a mobile computing device that runs on the Windows
>operating system made by once-bitter rival Microsoft.

Leave it to the suits to make (and justify) a mind-numbingly brain-dead decision.

So with Palm surrendering, where do we go from here? I've had a PalmOS device since the original Pilot 500 (with 1 Meg upgrade of course) and I have 9 years of appointments, notes, contacts, etc.

Anyone know of any good handheld Linux devices. I currently have a 650 (which I guess is now officially and EOL POS), and I was digging the convergence device. None of the Linux smartphones I've seen have looked that exciting. I've developed with Zaurus's before and while the Linux OS on them ran fine, the devices were disappointing.

I guess I could go BlackBerry, but the BlackBerry PIM apps suck. Symbian has never thrilled me either.

Back to a paper planner?

RE: Terrible terrible idea
hkklife @ 8/11/2005 11:03:39 PM # Q
Anyone remember Commodore's short-lived line of DOS/ Windows boxes? Atari's "Pro" line of PC compatibles? Nope? Thought so. Where are Commodore & Atari now? That's what I thought so---and no, kiddies, the Atari you see on game boxes nowadays is just a brand that was auctioned off to the highest bidder for easy shelf recognition by Infogrames.



RE: Terrible terrible idea
hkklife @ 8/11/2005 11:08:04 PM # Q
Where do we go from here?

Here's my plan:

Use my T5 until it craps out in a year or so. I also may buy a T|X or whatever it is later this year or early next year. If it's halfway decent and the rumor mill doesn't have any future POS-powered devices slated for release, I'll buy another one or two T|Xs or so and stash 'em away. I'll also keep burnded CDs of all of my registered apps and hard copies of my reg codes etc in case PalmGear/Handango et al tank.

I figure I can coast along on a few stockpiled Palm devices for a couple of years. By the time those are totally shot, the mobile computing landscape should be considerably changed and the Moto Q/Razr Smartphone will have had a few generations under its belt and be ready for primetime.

RE: Terrible terrible idea
T_W @ 8/11/2005 11:11:26 PM # Q
While we are at it, I'd really love to know the real reason why PalmOne knifed the Cobalt baby (and thereby destroyed the Palm platform for good). I guess the Handspring guys never really like the PalmSource idea?

Could Cobalt really have been *that bad*?

Hell, it was competing against Wince of all things! If they had crammed 500 monkeys riding high on crack into a Tungsten T case it could have compared favorably to Wince.

The end is near. Run for your lives!
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/11/2005 11:15:46 PM # Q
A friend just told me that if this Treo 670 is launched with WM, the first thing consumers will think is that Palm is admitting that "their" OS is inferior. And he is right.

Developers are not going to take this positively either.


Bingo. But Palm had no choice in the matter. They have to make money any way possible, and PalmOS has reached the End Of [the] Line. No sense in flogging a DEAD horse [PalmOS 5/Garnet is definitely a DEAD horse].

Developers aleady have a low opinion of Palm/PalmSource and most saw the writing on the wall years ago and now also develop apps for Windows Mobile. Any developer that sticks with PalmOS exclusively at this point is either:
a) stupid
b) suicidal
c) a hobby developer
d) on crack




------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

Come on now people - PalmOS still works!
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/11/2005 11:24:24 PM # Q
Leave it to the suits to make (and justify) a mind-numbingly brain-dead decision.

So with Palm surrendering, where do we go from here? I've had a PalmOS device since the original Pilot 500 (with 1 Meg upgrade of course) and I have 9 years of appointments, notes, contacts, etc.

Anyone know of any good handheld Linux devices. I currently have a 650 (which I guess is now officially and EOL POS), and I was digging the convergence device. None of the Linux smartphones I've seen have looked that exciting. I've developed with Zaurus's before and while the Linux OS on them ran fine, the devices were disappointing.

I guess I could go BlackBerry, but the BlackBerry PIM apps suck. Symbian has never thrilled me either.

Back to a paper planner?

I don't understand posts like yours. You have plenty of options - just buy some older PDAs and use them like you've always used PDAs. Yes, you won't have the latest in hardware, but at least you'll have a useful device. Face it: even a Palm Vx is a he11 of a lot better than a paper planner. Buy a CLIE TH55 and you'll get a solid device that you can easily get good use out of for another 5 years.




------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

RE: Terrible terrible idea
T_W @ 8/11/2005 11:26:30 PM # Q
I guess the Nokia 770 (http://www.nokia.com/nokia/0,,74866,00.html) is an option.

Not quite a PDA, but Nokia does seem to have gotten some of the Gnome hackers involved in the development of it, so there's a good chance it will see software updates.

PalmOS under seige: Circle the wagons, Martha. WinMob's here
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/11/2005 11:32:27 PM # Q
?Where do we go from here?

Here's my plan:

Use my T5 until it craps out in a year or so. I also may buy a T|X or whatever it is later this year or early next year. If it's halfway decent and the rumor mill doesn't have any future POS-powered devices slated for release, I'll buy another one or two T|Xs or so and stash 'em away. I'll also keep burnded CDs of all of my registered apps and hard copies of my reg codes etc in case PalmGear/Handango et al tank.

I figure I can coast along on a few stockpiled Palm devices for a couple of years. By the time those are totally shot, the mobile computing landscape should be considerably changed and the Moto Q/Razr Smartphone will have had a few generations under its belt and be ready for primetime.

hkklife: buy as many European CLIE TH55 as you can afford. It's a KILLER PDA and with Bluetooth AND Wi-Fi included, the TH55 won't be obsolete any time soon. I have several in storage and at this point I almost don't care what happens to Palm/PalmOS. I have all the apps I probably will ever need on a PDA, my setup is stable, and I can link to a Bluetooth phone as necessary.

If I can put on my [dusty, barely-used] Palm Apologist hat for a minute: FOR ME, PalmOS 5 can be set up to do MOST of the things I would ever want to do on a PDA. Hell - I would be happy even going back to my monochrome TRGpro if absolutely necessary. Even ancient Palms are great devices if you look at all the amazing things they can do. Yes, multitasking would be nice, but for now I'd rather stick to the CLIEs than reinvent the wheel by switching to Windows Mobile. Of course, StyleTap (www.styletap.com) may change how I feel about this if eventually we start seeing some REALLY good WinMob hardware with OLED screens...




------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

RE: Terrible terrible idea
VampireLestat @ 8/11/2005 11:39:25 PM # Q
First pic of Treo 700 with possibly Palm OS 6.

http://www.bargainpda.com/default.asp?newsID=2628

RE: Terrible terrible idea
T_W @ 8/11/2005 11:53:32 PM # Q
>I don't understand posts like yours.

Man, I don't want to be nursing a 10 year old Newton, or waiting for EComStation to release an OS/2 upgrade, or waiting for yellowTAB GmBH to release a BeOS upgrade, or writing a TCP/IP stack and web browser for a Commodore 64.

Platforms have natural bit rot. Once the owner of a platform gives up on it, its time to look for something else.

Now, I'm not going to throw my Treo 650 away tomorrow, but want to figure out where to go in the future. And beleive me, I bought my last copy of a Microsoft OS and my last machine with a Microsoft OS pre-installed a *long* time ago.

I disagree. Palms won't SUDDENLY become useless now.
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/12/2005 12:11:15 AM # Q
Man, I don't want to be nursing a 10 year old Newton, or waiting for EComStation to release an OS/2 upgrade, or waiting for yellowTAB GmBH to release a BeOS upgrade, or writing a TCP/IP stack and web browser for a Commodore 64.

Platforms have natural bit rot. Once the owner of a platform gives up on it, its time to look for something else.

Now, I'm not going to throw my Treo 650 away tomorrow, but want to figure out where to go in the future. And beleive me, I bought my last copy of a Microsoft OS and my last machine with a Microsoft OS pre-installed a *long* time ago.

[Palm Apologist mode=ON] Only problem with your comparisons is all of those other examples are all either VERY OLD or never had any significant market share to begin with (and therefore had few great applications available ). A platform is all about the APPLICATIONS available for it, and PalmOS is still in pretty good shape there. There aren't too many things I can do (albeit only one at a time!) on my CLIEs. DateBk5, HandyShopper, Documents To Go, Picsel, TCPMP, DiddleBug, NetFront, SnapperMail, McPhling, MultiUser Hack ;-O, PW-Patcher ;-O, YAUC, BackupMan, McFile... the top PalmOS apps are all rock solid and will be serviceable for years. And given how PalmOS many devices are out now there (and will remain available for a LOOOOONG time thanks to eBay!) the PalmOS market will be around for at least another 5 - 10 years. In fact, even if EVERY PalmOS developer closed shop TOMORROW, those devices don't suddenly stop being useful and those apps don't suddenly disappear.

It all boils down to whether or not having the latest + greatest of modern PDA hardware is absolutely essential to you*. [/Palm Apologist mode=OFF]

The Palm Apologist of Reason




*But VGA OLED-screened Windows Mobile hardware might be the siren song that finally lures the remaining PalmOS faithful to their doom... I won't hear that song since I've got Motorhead cranked on my CLIES 24/7! ;-O




------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

My Freudian Slip?
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/12/2005 12:37:09 AM # Q
There aren't too many things I can't do (albeit only one at a time!) on my CLIEs.


------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

Die hard M$-Haters
sr4 @ 8/12/2005 3:25:56 AM # Q
There's some die-hard MS haters here, arnt there. What happened to using the best tool for the job. Palm is "like Switzerland", why cant you be? If a device has flexibility and features you want, why go to a Nokia 770 when it doesn't even have proper power management?

The wide selection of hardware available on the WM side will ensure there is a device that meets your needs. I suggest you give it a try. And for the person who thinks WM5 will be as bad as Win CE 1, you forget as times go on, windows gets better. WM5 promises to be the Windows 2000 of the mobile world.

Surur

RE: Terrible terrible idea
AdamaDBrown @ 8/12/2005 4:57:10 AM # Q
I think you guys overstate the impact a bit. This will probably turn out to be a good size boost for Palm's bottom line. And if they don't let things stagnate, if they keep it fresh and try to bring in Cobalt, they could still do quite well for themselves. The only way that they can screw it up is by either pumping out lackluster hardware, expecting Windows to solve their problems, or by allowing the Windows units to take over their product line by not producing anything compelling on the Palm OS side.

RE: Die hard M$-Haters
T_W @ 8/12/2005 1:34:42 PM # Q
>There's some die-hard MS haters here, arnt there.

Its an enitrely rational result of 15 years of dissatisfaction using and developing for MS platforms. On the flip side, I have no interest in helping a convicted abusive monopolist leverage its monopoly to dominate another market.


>Palm is "like Switzerland", why cant you be?

Wake me when your precious Microsoft is "like Switzerland" and I can:
1) Download MSN Messenger for PalmOS,
2) Download Windows Media Player for PalmOS,
3) Save MS Office documents in the OASIS Open Document Format
4) Get the full user experience while accessing Outlook Web Access using Firefox

etc. etc.


>The wide selection of hardware available on the WM side will
>ensure there is a device that meets your needs.

HAH. Do you want "gray box A" or "gray box B"?


>WM5 promises to be the Windows 2000 of the mobile world.

So mediocre, uninventive and insecure. Sounds perfect.

Palm Apologists: Is this the best you can come up with? Wow.
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/13/2005 6:48:47 AM # Q
>There's some die-hard MS haters here, arnt there.

Its an enitrely rational result of 15 years of dissatisfaction using and developing for MS platforms. On the flip side, I have no interest in helping a convicted abusive monopolist leverage its monopoly to dominate another market.

You seem to have a lot of "issues" with Microsoft. Why didn't you simply move to another platform a LONG time ago? You know, the perfect platform.


>Palm is "like Switzerland", why cant you be?

Wake me when your precious Microsoft is "like Switzerland" and I can:
1) Download MSN Messenger for PalmOS,
2) Download Windows Media Player for PalmOS,
3) Save MS Office documents in the OASIS Open Document Format
4) Get the full user experience while accessing Outlook Web Access using Firefox

etc. etc.

Someone will wake you up right after Apple lets all other digital music players use their compression format and iTunes. Try to remember: this is business - not the United Nations or a volunteer organization. It amazes me to see how many people think they're entitled to get something for nothing (or next to nothing). Please ask yourself WHY companies like Apple might not share certain applications or Intellectual Property with their competition. Maybe someday you'll figure out why your post is so ludicrous.


>The wide selection of hardware available on the WM side will
>ensure there is a device that meets your needs.

HAH. Do you want "gray box A" or "gray box B"?

The Dell X50v, Loox 720 etc don't look like bland gray boxes to me. In fact, PalmOS users have been drooling for hardware like that for the past 10 years. Instead, we get buggy crap like the absurdly overpriced Tungsten 5 and the Not Ready For Prime Time LifeDrive. I wonder how many longtime Palm users have dumped PalmOS in disgust during the past couple years because they gave up waiting for Palm to release something even slightly as competitive as "gray box A" or "gray box B"?


Ancient Chinese proverb: "People in glass houses should not fire machine guns."

TVoR



------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

Reply to this comment

Why it's still early in the game

cervezas @ 8/12/2005 2:13:47 AM # Q
I'm going to go out on a limb here and state that I think we will all look back on this time and realize we were suffering from a pretty myopic perspective of the "smart device" market. Here are the artificial blinders I see a lot of people in this forum wearing right now:

1. They think of the fairly sluggish US smartphone market as being the whole market when in fact it is dwarfed by the global market. That global market is young and has huge legs on it.

2. They think of smartphones/communicators as a big, important market when in fact it is still currently very small (3-4%) compared to the "pretty smart" phones commonly called feature phones. If companies like PalmSource, MS, and Symbian can give feature phone users ANY kind of reason at all to move up to a smarter device the demand for smartphones will be orders of magnitude beyond what it is today within a few years.

3. They think of the mobile device market as being similar to the PC market. But the more personal a technology is, the more people want it to be personalized and the less popular a commoditized product will be. This means that unlike the PC market there is not going to be a strong consolidation around platforms in the forseeable future. Instead, platforms are probably going to differentiate even more. It also means that the mobile OS companies that do the best will be the ones who give device vendors the greatest opportunity to differentiate and innovate, not the ones whose designs drive mobile devices toward commoditization.

4. They think Microsoft is doing a good enough job to succeed with products like WM 2005 based on comparisons to Palm OS Garnet. The truth is that *nobody* is doing a good job right now in the mobile market. Consumers are spending lots of money on all kinds of mobile devices, but except for media players there is not a lot of satisfaction with them. In other words, what's lacking isn't marketing muscle or more checkmarks against a list of presently available features, it's innovation. Innovation can turn the entire market upside down in the blink of an eye. This market is inherently VERY unstable and full of opportunity, even for the small players.

Once you take off the blinders and get the bigger picture it's hard to escape certain conclusions that make a lot of the hand-wringing over the future of Palm OS seem a little bit silly. (Not that there aren't reasons for concern, just that things people are choosing to be concerned about are not the right ones.)

First conclusion: The market is very very young and is going to be growing in 20 different directions in the next decade. Growing FAST.

Second conclusion: If differentiation and innovation are the key to success then monolithic proprietary platforms like Windows Mobile and Symbian are at an inherent disadvantage in the coming market compared to platforms that build on open, modular kernels like Linux. There's a reason that Linux is growing 4 times faster than Windows Mobile as a smartphone platform. Take a look at the veritable zoo of innovative Linux phones selling in Asia and you can see that open platforms are the path to all kinds of coolness (as well as cheapness).

Third conclusion: The game is not going to be won--or lost--by anyone in the next two, three or five years. Not by Symbian, not by Microsoft, and not by PalmSource.

In my opinion, Palm OS is a key piece in the Linux success story. Whatever happens with Cobalt, it has one really big thing going for it: it's a really good start on Palm OS for Linux. Just being able to put a really flexible, personalizable, easy to use, OS that comes with 30,000 applications on a Linux kernel is a big innovation from the standpoint of the market. PalmSource is very very lucky to have stumbled into this position where they can repurpose so much of the work on Cobalt and get the proprietary monkey off their back.

Will PalmSource succeed in keeping the Palm OS platform moving forward? Hell if I know. Anything can happen at this point. We're only a few moves into a long and interesting multiplayer chess game and it's way too early to call the outcome. I certainly don't think we can call any player in this game any where near dead today.


David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
www.pikesoft.com

I've heard enough of these 30 000 apps!
sr4 @ 8/12/2005 3:33:29 AM # Q

I've heard enough of these 30 000 apps! Its a complete nonsense. Most of these apps are pre OS 5, they have not been updates to one handed, stylus free usage, and will crash NVFS devices easily. They are also ugly and amateurish in most cases, and not adapted to devices with color screens and plenty of processing power. They will also not work at different resolutions

The POS platform and software library will be irrelevant in two years time, and what people with "feature phones" want is not a nice shopping list app, but a nice racing game. WM is set to deliver this much sooner and in better quality, with devices that are available now, and can grow to supply the needs of people if they feel the desire to.

Surur

RE: Why it's still early in the game
Adrenochrome @ 8/12/2005 7:22:20 AM # Q
David, I don't know why you post here. Your reasoned and courteous posts are an affront to this forum. This is a place to rant about how Palm OS will kill itself in one year. If you can't pick your side and defend it beyond reason, you're just going to seem weak and insightful to the rest of us. This is a site not just with which to predict the future, but to demand your predicted future is true and inevitable. And please take care to shout down anyone who disagrees with you, otherwise you’ll just look rude.

RE: Why it's still early in the game
cervezas @ 8/12/2005 8:53:35 AM # Q
Surer wrote:
I've heard enough of these 30 000 apps! Its a complete nonsense. Most of these apps are pre OS 5, they have not been updates to one handed, stylus free usage, and will crash NVFS devices easily. They are also ugly and amateurish in most cases, and not adapted to devices with color screens and plenty of processing power. They will also not work at different resolutions

Oh yeah, that's right. Win32 and Symbian applications don't have *any* platform compatibility problems when you move them to a new version of Windows or a device with a different screen do they? ;) Sorry, Surer, WM is a great platform but I'm afraid backward compatibility is *not* an area where it compares favorably with Palm OS. WHICH IS WHY MICROSOFT IS GOING DOWN IN **FLAMES** IN 2006! Alas, poor Bill, we hardly knew ya. BWAAAAAAH!!! (There, does that meet the mimimum hyperbole and childishness requirements for PIC?)

The POS platform and software library will be irrelevant in two years time, and what people with "feature phones" want is not a nice shopping list app, but a nice racing game. WM is set to deliver this much sooner and in better quality, with devices that are available now, and can grow to supply the needs of people if they feel the desire to.

I don't know why you think graphics and gaming will particularly favor WM over Linux on mobile devices when there is no apparent advantage on the desktop. Even Cobalt has an enviable graphics engine base on OpenGL: powerful and portable. And you're forgetting in all of this that it's not just easy to port old Palm OS apps to the new platform, it's going to be easy to port Linux stuff as well. TiVO on your Palm anyone?


David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
www.pikesoft.com

RE: Why it's still early in the game
souterj @ 8/12/2005 9:19:42 AM # Q
Adrenachrome - your remarks are incisive, blunt and I completely agree with your remarks for many of the regular commentators foudn herein.

[Mini Rant Mode=ON]

This forum is a place for airing OPINIONS - but some folks are so up themselves that they mistake their opinions as FACTS.

Take Adrenachrome's comments seriously, do a reality check before you post and leave that ego bullsh*t outside this forum, where it belongs!

Hey - this might even become a nicer place to exchange ideas and comments, rather than the childish mindless bullyboy playground it often resembles!

There's some bright people here, why not put that intelligence to more constructive use?

[Mini Rant Mode=OFF]

So how about lobbying Palm for USB host functionality on their next-gen devices. Sure would be cool to be able to plug in a USB hard drive unit for mass storage on demand, if you're not a LifeDrive fan? Great way of keeping costs down too - only those needing HD storage will need to invest extra in it.

Anyhow, looking forward to more constructive posts - there have been some encouragingly mature ones the past few days (if you can wade through the bilge that surrounds it!)

Have a great weekend all,


KultiVator

If the stick sh*ts... throw it!

RE: Why it's still early in the game
lamp @ 8/12/2005 9:50:09 AM # Q
>>>
WHICH IS WHY MICROSOFT IS GOING DOWN IN **FLAMES** IN 2006! Alas, poor Bill, we hardly knew ya. BWAAAAAAH!!! (There, does that meet the mimimum hyperbole and childishness requirements for PIC?)
<<<

By George, I think he's got it! ;-)

Glad you're here Cervezas.



RE: Why it's still early in the game
DevPOV @ 8/12/2005 10:15:03 AM # Q
Cervezas, you're cracking me up! Good posts!

RE: Why it's still early in the game
sr4 @ 8/12/2005 11:01:03 AM # Q

It was not me who claimed 30 000 apps. I am only the one shooting it down in flames. From your response it appears you agree with me that the claim is overblown, possibly for all platforms, but definitely for POS.

BTW, adding DirectX will make it very easy for game publishers to make money from their back catalogue by porting desktop apps to mobile devices. This is a hot area right now, with many 80's games being seen again on phones. With more powerfull devices the quality of games are expected to increase also.

This is MS's way of challenging the PSP via a backdoor. Imagine X-box live games being played via mobile phone. So here I am not talking about the potential of the devices, but MS leveraging their desktop presence into an advantage on a mobile device. Do you find any fault in my analysis?

Surur

RE: Why it's still early in the game
LiveFaith @ 8/12/2005 11:09:19 AM # Q
Dave,
Thanks for the very good insights. Altho, surur does have a point on the # of apps. I've always been fascinated by how WM & POS freaks trot out those #s. If I see one more Palm OS app that turns the screen into a compact mirror, then I'm gonna scream!

Pat Horne; www.churchoflivingfaith.com
RE: Why it's still early in the game
cervezas @ 8/12/2005 1:40:31 PM # Q
Yeah, I agree there are a fair amount of crappy apps out there and the 30,000 should be taken with a trowel-full of salt. But you have to admit that the large number of apps does create a lot of loyalty to the platform. I know so many people who use Palms specifically because of some hobby or oddball interest they have where some guy has created a shareware app just for that interest.

Just a recent example: I was walking my dogs the other day past some nearby caves that are frequented by spelunkers and there was a guy with an ruggedized Aceeca Meazura on his belt getting ready to go in with a group of cavers. He uses some kind of Palm shareware app that lets him load cave maps and log his explorations.

For others (my hand is up) the significance of all the choice is that instead of 3 or 4 different apps for tracking your time working on projects there's more like 20, one of which is exactly the way they like to do it.

I'm not sure if this is still the case, but the software options for medical users used to be vastly better for Palm OS than WM. There were one or more tools for every conceivable kind of specialist.

People surprisingly often stick to OS platforms just because of a single application that they just can't find on the platform they'd otherwise prefer. Desktop Linux suffers terribly from this problem. I hear all the time: "Open Office is great and Linux looks easy to use now but the only problem is that it doesn't run X, which we have to have."

Apps matter. A lot. And not just glitzy multimedia ones, although those do matter a lot too.



David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
www.pikesoft.com

RE: Why it's still early in the game
cervezas @ 8/12/2005 2:01:19 PM # Q
Surer wrote:
So here I am not talking about the potential of the devices, but MS leveraging their desktop presence into an advantage on a mobile device. Do you find any fault in my analysis?

Sure, no question that leveraging their successful desktop (and server) technologies is Microsoft's strong suit and it makes them a formidable competitor. Increasingly, though, the technical advantage of this is getting blunted by a reluctance among device makers to get locked in to proprietary OS vendors that tell them in considerable detail how their devices are going to look and work, when they are going to receive OS updates, what kind of screen resolutions they can use (not the low-cost 320x320 panels in the case of WM), etc. All this stuff matters, too.


David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
www.pikesoft.com

RE: Why it's still early in the game
PenguinPowered @ 8/12/2005 2:03:31 PM # Q
Ah, a clear and well reasoned comment. Very insightful, David. Thanks.

Now, the real question: which of the many players will execute well?



WM has more apps than POS - Handango
sr4 @ 8/12/2005 2:10:50 PM # Q
If you are going to look purely at number of apps then, it appears WM has more apps available at Handango.com than POS.

WM 16903 Titles

WM Smartphone 1465 Titles

POS 15261 Titles

Another myth of POS superiority shown to be false. You know things have really changed since 2001. Forget anything you know from then.

Surur

RE: Why it's still early in the game
sr4 @ 8/12/2005 3:51:39 PM # Q
cervezas said
Increasingly, though, the technical advantage of this is getting blunted by a reluctance among device makers to get locked in to proprietary OS vendors that tell them in considerable detail how their devices are going to look and work, when they are going to receive OS updates, what kind of screen resolutions they can use (not the low-cost 320x320 panels in the case of WM), etc. All this stuff matters, too.

Yes, due to MS's reputation for creating a generic platform vs a collection of proprietary less differentiated devices MS has had less penetration with large players. This has resulted in MS approaching smaller players and offering to be their "star maker". So far this strategy has worked very well, due to MS's focus on business users and due to the network effects of standardizing over many different manufacturers. The API was the same (in general) on an Acer device as a HP device.

HTC for example has done very well as the ODM for HP, Dell, FSC, and have made more than a billion dollars last year. They are a small company, but are selling spectacular devices right next to Nokia and Motorola.

Having multiple proprietary platforms actually hurt users. Look at the CDMA vs GSM example. Standardizing on Windows has reduced the amount of work developers had to do and the platforms they needed to support, while still serving 90% of the market. If every city had is own voltage the cost of electrical appliances would increase accordingly. Networks are settling on TCP/IP, and this is fueling the growth of cheap Internet connected appliances, and reduced the amount of training networks specialists need to have.

If something is intended to be basic and fundamental it benefits from being standardized. Things that were previously high level, such as network protocols, benefit from being standardized as the number of elements in the network grows. Even the standardization of containers had an enormous effect on increasing the efficiency of international trade.

In summary then, having a standard OS for mobile devices will be of benefit to users, and will lead to greater development of the platform and greater penetration amongst the general population.

The OEM's may fear it, but due to the benefits its virtually impossible to resist. Palm has just succumbed to this pressure.

Surur

RE: Why it's still early in the game
PenguinPowered @ 8/12/2005 9:54:35 PM # Q
I think there's nothing funnier than describing M$'s software design approach as standardized. That's kind of like discovering the horse of a different color in the wizard of oz as 'monochrome'.


RE: Why it's still early in the game
sr4 @ 8/12/2005 10:02:31 PM # Q
Its a de facto standard of course, not de jure. Doesn't mean you cant still run your win 98 apps on Windows XP. That developer who wrote the educational software 6 years ago is very glad he can still make money on his software due to this, and he is probably quite glad that things have remained largely stable.

Surur

Time to stop the B.S., Palm Apologists. NO MORE LIES!
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/12/2005 10:28:39 PM # Q
Anyone who claims PalmOS is superior in 2005 because it has "30,000" [or any bogus number you want to choose] doesn't have a clue what they're talking about. Really. You should know better, Beersy. Repeating mindless drivel like that only gives Palm detractors more evidence that those defending PalmOS have little to back up their flimsy position. The sad thing is that once this nonsense gets said once it's repeated as if it were fact.

If it wasn't for Surur, it's actually amazing how many lies and halftruths posted on the Palm sites would go unchallenged. I'm sick of the deception. Ultimately, the market will separate the wheat from the chaff. Until then, the Palm Apologists need to stop ignoring truths that are obvious to all impartial observers. (Denying the existence of WinMob Treos, then rationalizing that they won't hurt PalmOS is a particularly egregious example...)

I will destroy some of the more recent lies later.

TVoR


------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

RE: Why it's still early in the game
T_W @ 8/13/2005 12:52:57 AM # Q
>In summary then, having a standard OS for mobile devices will be
>of benefit to users, and will lead to greater development of the
>platform and greater penetration amongst the general population.

Man you just lined up at the Microsoft trough of hype and took a big bite didn't you?

The Microsoft PC monopoly has stifled innovation in the PC market and led to artificially high OS prices. As the price of every major component of a PC has come down except for the OS.

Microsoft has systematically taken apart the PC ISV market via bundling and unfair competition. This also has led to artificially high prices and lack of competition.

Microsoft is a complacent monopolist and has little incentive to invest in their own products once monopoly status is reached. This leads to wonders like IE staying essentially frozen with a borked up CSS implementation for 5 years.

The Microsoft monoculture combined with Microsoft's own lax approach to computer security has led to a abundandt environment for virus, worm, and trojan writers, costing its customers billions when they need to essentially halt computer operations because virus du jour is wreaking havoc on their networks.

This also necessitates Microsoft's customers spend billions of dollars and hours on virus and anti-spyware software and procedures, which should in reality be paid for my Microsoft since the only reason they exist is to patch faults in Microsoft's own software and security models.

Just wait and see what happens if the Microsoft monoculture takes hold in the mobile phone market. Imagine entire wireless carriers take offline as there networks are infiltrated by worm du jour. Take the Code Red scenario of a few years back and multiply it by 100.

Stagnation, artificially high prices, insecurity and instability. That will be the "benefit" of Microsoft dominating the mobile device market. Sounds alot like the PC market right now.

Enjoy cleaning some nasty bluetooth enabled spyware of your Loox smart phone.

FUD-tastic
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/13/2005 5:17:15 AM # Q
Golly gee whiz. The anti-Microsoft FUD's getting a little silly now. When are we going to hear that Gates was really The Lone Gunman?


------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

RE: Why it's still early in the game
sr4 @ 8/13/2005 5:19:16 AM # Q

Are you saying there were no benefits on the desktop? And are you saying there will be no benefits of standardization in the mobile field? You need to look at the bigger picture.

Surur

Don't expect a coherent, intelligent response, Surur
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/13/2005 5:40:03 AM # Q
Quite frankly, I'm embarassed at how poorly the Palm Apologists have done in trying to argue in favor of the platform.

I suppose this anti-Microsoft basher feels it would be better if the desktop market was evenly divided between Windows, MacOS, 5 flavors of Unix (including Linux), Amiga, Atari, Commodore 64, Commodore Vic 20, and Coleco Adam. All incompatible with the other. All requiring unique applications.

Windows has its own set of headaches, but if set up properly and running the best apps, it's a pretty stable platform these days. You also know what you're getting and there's decent support of legacy applications.

There will likely be some consolidation of the numbers of mobile OSes but it will be good once developers are able to minimize their efforts in covering the various types of hardware. It's too bad JAVA hasn't lived up to its hype - it could have saved us from a lot of redundancy. Perhaps the other environments that promise easy porting will mature to the point of usefulness, but I not expecting this will happen soon.

I expect the mobile device market will quickly standardize on:
- Windows Mobile
- various skins over the Linux kernel

PalmOS is committing hari-kiri even as we speak and will not survive as a major player long enough for PalmLinux to be created, debugged and released (2007). PalmSource's problem is that PalmLinux is VAPORWARE, while Windows Mobile and Linux already exist and are developing momentum. Had PalmLinux been released in 2003 or 2004, PalmSource actually had a good chance to have become a major player in the mobile device world for another decade. Instead, they are stuck with a hopelessly-overextended simple organizer OS that's overmatched in trying to compete with modern OSes. (But it's still impressive to see what a brave effort PalmOS 5 put up in devices like the Treo 600 and the CLIE VZ90. PalmOS 5 ("Garnet") is like an older middleweight champion - that should have already have retired - trying to take on a vicious young heavyweight champion (think Mike Tyson in his prime). No contest. I just hope PalmOS' corner throws in the towel before PalmOS gets killed in the ring. It's already taken several savage blows to the head and is about to be given a standing eight count.

TVoR




------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

RE: Why it's still early in the game
ChiA @ 8/13/2005 6:09:13 AM # Q
I can't think of any other industry where one company so completely dominates the field, be it aircraft manufacture, oil and petrochemicals, automobile, pharmaceuticals, finance, retailing, entertainment, telecoms etc. Therefore Microsoft's domination of the computer OS industry does seem on the face of it, unnatural when compared to all other industries on Earth.

"What counts is not necessarily the size of the dog in the fight but the size of the fight in the dog" - Dwight D. Eisenhower
RE: Why it's still early in the game
sr4 @ 8/13/2005 6:39:24 AM # Q
I think its pretty natural that one OS became the standard, due to network effects and interoperability concerns. However the fact that its one company thats in control of that OS,when looking at from your perspective, its pretty strange. Its probably a side-effect of copyright law. Patents expire in 17 years, copyright in 70+lifetime. Only MS can make Windows.

Surur

RE: Why it's still early in the game
PenguinPowered @ 8/13/2005 11:10:11 AM # Q
Windows is no defacto standard. There are well behaved programs written for windows version X that fail to run on windows version successor(X) for all values of X.

Microsoft enjoys gratuituously changing interfaces and only does a half-hearted job of maintaining release to release compatibility.

Even something as simple as a service pack upgrade for a particular version of Windows, most recently service pack one of XP, will break compatibility within that version.

That's what makes claims of M$ "standards" so funny.

By contrast, IBM maintained binary upward compatibility over significant OS changes, and significant hardware changes across thirty years, back in the days of 360/370 hardware. That set the standard (pun intended) for defacto standards.


RE: Why it's still early in the game
PenguinPowered @ 8/13/2005 11:20:04 AM # Q
It's not "natural" that one OS dominate the market, although it's been true since the 1960s, when the OS was called "OS" and came from IBM.

It is "natural" that effective monopolies slow innovation, as witness the change of pace in telecoms innovation since AT&T was broken up.

In the 80s, we figured out how to interconnect large numbers of widly different computers running wildy different OSes. The buzz phrase was "interoperability" and key was open standards.

Then along came M$ and the "pc revolution" to hijack the whole thing. As a result, in 2005, commercialy available distributed computing is still about 10 years shy of what the research community had in 1985. This is double the pre-m$ delay for adoption of research advances into the commercial sphere.

The most recent release of visual studio, for example, is about 2/3 as useful as the IDE on a 1980 vintage Smalltalk workstation.

That's the tradeoff, and the irony, of OS monopolies. Monopolies bring about ease of deployment at the same time as they stiffle the innovations that would be worth deploying.



RE: Why it's still early in the game
Gekko @ 8/13/2005 11:22:02 AM # Q

PenguinBoy - maybe PSRC employees should stop wasting their time posting here spinning and attacking MSFT. maybe they should just get back to their own work on the good ship PSRC. These schmucks have wasted the last 4+ years - and got nothing done. PSRC is circling the bowl and all the spin in the world isn't going to stop it from going right down the drain. After 4+ years of spin and empty promises, we're tired of all the bullshiit.

RE: Why it's still early in the game
sr4 @ 8/13/2005 11:34:38 AM # Q

So at least you admit it leads to ease of deployment? How about playing devil's advocate for a second and think of the other advantages of a monopoly.

Surur

PenguinPowered - some reading matter for you.
sr4 @ 8/13/2005 11:43:54 AM # Q
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_monopoly

Network effects are considered separately from natural monopoly status. Natural monopoly effects are a property of the producer's cost curves, whilst network effects arise from the benefit to the consumers of a good from standardization of the good. Many goods have both properties, like operating system software and telephone networks.

Software is often taken to be a natural monopoly, due to the high cost of making the first copy and the low cost of replication. Software patents represent an additional barrier in some jurisdictions. These factors create an average cost curve that typically decreases for any quantity greater than one. This argument has been used to justify arguments relating both to Microsoft's current personal computer software market domination, and to suggest the possibility of its replacement by a future natural monopoly of free software. However, Microsoft's dominance is largely due to network effects rather than economies of scale; the costs of production are high compared to costs of distribution, but low compared to the price the market will bear (hence Microsoft's large profits). Absent benefits for consumers from standardization, it is highly unlikely that Microsoft's share of the PC software market (90%+ for operating systems) would be so high.

Open that closed mind a bit, it needs an airing.

Surur

PalmSource employees: Less SPIN, better OS, please
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/13/2005 1:20:35 PM # Q
PenguinBoy - maybe PSRC employees should stop wasting their time posting here spinning and attacking MSFT. maybe they should just get back to their own work on the good ship PSRC. These schmucks have wasted the last 4+ years - and got nothing done. PSRC is circling the bowl and all the spin in the world isn't going to stop it from going right down the drain. After 4+ years of spin and empty promises, we're tired of all the bullshiit.

Well said Gekko. It's pathetic seeing how far these people will go trying to pull the wool over our eyes. Posts from PalmSource's SPIN PhD (the late Michael Mace) were just as odious as Mr. Fout's current attacks on Microsoft. You'd think that if Microsoft had no redeeming qualities, by now there would be an alternative desktop OS. MacOS, BeOS, OS/2, Linux, etc have all failed to take any significant amount of market share from Microsoft's desktop OS in the past 10 years of trying. Instead of constantly wringing their hands and blaming "evil" Microsoft for their failures, perhaps supporters of these alternate OSes should take a hard look at WHY their pet OSes aren't/didn't catch on. Despite what Microsoft bashers would have us believe, the blame for the failures of Microsoft's competitors frequently should be placed squarely at the feet of the companies producing those alternate OSes. I'd encourage people to read about the history of MacOS, BeOS and OS/2 before mouthing off at how "evil" Microsoft is. And if you think Apple, Be and IBM were benevolent OS companies out to save the world, guess again. Some of the crap those guys have pulled over the years makes Microdoft look like Mother Theresa. I do have a lot of respect for Linux though, and with a LOT of effort (and MUCH better support from application developers!) it has the potential to theaten the Windows hegemony.


------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

God Bless Surur! ;-O
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/13/2005 1:52:13 PM # Q
Surur, you crack me up! Do you EVER get tired of making people look like idiots by debunking their lies with independent, referenced info? (Not that I trust an online encyclopedia, though. Maybe you wrote that definition of "Natural monopoly" this morning? ;-O) You're such a bada$$ - too bad you're a member of Bill's Redmond Collective. One question, though. I've never seen this brought up before: are you a Microsoft employee or are you paid to post on Palm sites? You're absolutely relentless, Bubba!

I'm currently writing an opinion piece on why PalmOS may STILL be a better choice than PPC/WinMob but I expect it won't withstand a withering Surur-style cross examination. But given the pathetic peformance of Palm Apologists like Jeff Kirvin, PenguinPowered/Marty Fouts, just_little_me (another PalmSource employee? I'll check with my sources next week...), svrontis, RhinoSteve, etc, I figure I should at least try to play Devil's Advocate and defend the platform. [Anyone else notice how all the Palm Apologists seem to either work for/want to work for/sell software for Palm/PalmSource, while the people critical of Palm/PalmSource are mainly longtime PalmOS users? Hmmmmmmmmmm...]




------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

RE: Why it's still early in the game
sr4 @ 8/13/2005 2:59:45 PM # Q
No, I'm no MS employee. I do not even work in IT. I'm just a WM fan who has been disappointed by Palm in the past. My first PDA was a Palm IIIe. I had that PDA for more than a year, until it fell and broke the screen. I do not know if you recall, but Palm released a ROM update, and I discovered my device had no flash ROM, only normal ROM. While other Palm III's could upgrade, my Palm IIIe was a deadend. Lets just say Palm lost my admiration and custom after this.

Either way, I just like to debate, and will listen to any reasonable argument either way. I do however feel any theory needs to at least explain reality e.g don't say more people buy Palm OS devices because they are simple, when more other devices are sold.

I look forward to your Defense Of Palm OS, and to dissecting it too. ;)

Surur

PalmOS platform under siege + attacked from within.
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/13/2005 3:53:26 PM # Q
No, I'm no MS employee. I do not even work in IT. I'm just a WM fan who has been disappointed by Palm in the past.


Good to hear. Funny how Mr. "PenguinPowered" won't admit he's a PalmSource employee when he got caught Astroturfing, isn't it? There are a few other Astroturfers that I may expose later...

My first PDA was a Palm IIIe. I had that PDA for more than a year, until it fell and broke the screen. I do not know if you recall, but Palm released a ROM update, and I discovered my device had no flash ROM, only normal ROM. While other Palm III's could upgrade, my Palm IIIe was a deadend. Lets just say Palm lost my admiration and custom after this.

I had a 4 MB IIIx at that point. I knew about the memory limitation (MaskROM?) in the IIIe. But to be honest, that model was intended for newbies. I doubt even 1 in 1000 people who bought IIIe would have flashed their devices if they had normal RAM. Yes, Palm cut corners on the IIIe to save a couple bucks, thereby making their device less functional (SEE A TREND?), but at least there were other options available - like the IIIx - had you done a little research back then (1999?).

Either way, I just like to debate, and will listen to any reasonable argument either way. I do however feel any theory needs to at least explain reality e.g don't say more people buy Palm OS devices because they are simple, when more other devices are sold.

So I guess you find Jeff Kirvin as annoying as I do! ;-O He is probably the worst debater and weakest advocate for the PalmOS paltform I've seen on the various Palm sites.

I look forward to your Defense Of Palm OS, and to dissecting it too. ;)

Be gentle! ;-O

Actually I'm not sure if I'll post it, since it's not passing my own litmus test. It's not good when you're able to easily deconstruct a position you're trying to argue in favor of...

I've loaded up on CLIEs in my bunker and know the PalmOS app library so well that I now have hundreds of apps (many are obscure) that do everything I would ever want to do on a PDA. It would be impossible to fully replicate my setup with a Windows device. (Are there equally-simple apps like Plonk, Open, MultiUser Hack, Picsel, AppStats available for WinMob?) There are also some specialty app I use that were either abandoned or will never be ported to Windows Mobile. Plus it's nice using a comfortable, familier environment + apps. The one ever-present question is StyleTap Platform. If they continue to improve their PalmOS emulator, Palm is totally fcuked.

But the only way I would completely switch to WinMob is if someone created a design as noteworthy as the CLIE UX50 (but with an OLED screen) and there are no "issues" with StyleTap. Otherwise, I'll be quite happy using my CLIES for the next 5 - 10 years. (Just as even today there are many people content with still using Palm III, V, m505 (YUCK!), Handspring Visors, etc.) I have a feeling this kind of siege mentality will soon set in among PalmOS users, much as it did with people who own Newtons, PSIONs, Amigas, etc.

TVoR




------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

RE: Why it's still early in the game
AdamaDBrown @ 8/13/2005 4:25:35 PM # Q
There's some misuse of the word "proprietary" going on earlier in this thread. Implying that Windows is proprietary but Palm isn't is incorrect. Any operating system that is not open-source is to some degree proprietary, because it's owned by a single entity. This includes Palm, Windows, Symbian, etcetera. You can open up the frameworks and APIs, and all three of these do so, but the OS is still owned by a single entity.

Likewise, CDMA and GSM are *not* proprietary. They're formed by a unified standards body, and not owned by any one company. They are competing standards, yes, but that doesn't make them proprietary.

As an aside, Penguin, it's pretty pathetic when you argue that 1985 software is better than 2005 software because it's not Microsoft.

RE: Why it's still early in the game
PenguinPowered @ 8/13/2005 11:48:54 PM # Q
Now that is hillarious: quoting a wiki on issues of economics. I assume you realize that the wiki doesn't say anthing that disagrees with any of the points I was making. (It's wrong about software being a natural monopoly, but that's a separate discussion.) I also assume you realize that nothing said by m$ fans has addressed any of those points.

If I understand what you mean by "astroturfing", I'm not. No one pays me to post anywhere. No one I have ever worked for would be insane enough to think that I'd post anything other than my own opinion. By the way, I've posted nothing defending PalmOS. Don't use it much. Don't know much about it. My last PalmOS device is a HandSpring Visor Neo that I do use for geocaching. It's more than sufficent for that.

Do use M$ products a lot though. Have plenty of direct experience and reasons to complain. I first used a M$ product in 1979 or 1980. I've used them ever since. Had reason to complain since 1980. They've always been buggy, slow, full of pseudo-features, and far behind the real innovation. At first they weren't bloated, but that was corrected sometime around windows/95. And no, M$ doesn't promulgate defacto or dejure standards. it breaks what it wants, when it wants.

First time I tried to evaluate WINCE for an embedded system was in 2000. At that time I predicted it would be around 2010 before hardware caught up enough with M$ bloat for a WIN product to be usable in an embedded system. Looks like I missed it by 2 years -- Winmob way well be useful in 2008, after all.

In all those years, m$ has done three things that deserve credit: tool-tips, Remote Desktop Client, and the tilt version of the wheel mouse. Well, four, if you count earning Paul Allen enough money so that he could fund SpaceShipOne.

OH, and I wait patiently. At the rate of improvement in m$ developer's tools, they should probably reach the quality of a 1980 Smalltalk wokrstation sometime around 2020.


PalmSource employee Astroturfing on Palminfocenter
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/14/2005 3:13:06 AM # Q
If I understand what you mean by "astroturfing", I'm not. No one pays me to post anywhere. No one I have ever worked for would be insane enough to think that I'd post anything other than my own opinion. By the way, I've posted nothing defending PalmOS. Don't use it much. Don't know much about it.

Marty, everyone is now aware who you are. When caught Astroturfing what should the Astroturfer do?

a) Keep posting as if nothing happened.
b) Make up more lies and pretend nothing happened
c) Apologize and stop Astroturfing
d) Disappear without a trace

Your choice, Mr. Fouts.


TVoR


------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

RE: Why it's still early in the game
ChiA @ 8/14/2005 4:35:21 AM # Q
Surer said: I think its pretty natural that one OS became the standard, due to network effects and interoperability concerns.

I take on board your point but we don't all have to have the same OS to achieve interoperability, just a set of common agreed standards. GSM mobiles and networks are an excellent example. You have different equipment containing different embedded OSes yet they can all pass voice and data between each other in a manner that's transparent to the users.

HTML is another good example. I remember when Tim Berners-Lee created the world wide web, he did it because the physicists he was working with had info stored on different types of computer systems spread all around the world in different formats which were inaccessible to each other. Thus he created HTML so that data could be accessible irrespective of the OS you were using.

So Microsoft coming along with Internet Explorer which broke standards and people who design websites which proclaim "can only be viewed with IE" are the very antithesis of the World Wide Web concept.

RE: Why it's still early in the game
skeezix @ 8/15/2005 12:04:15 PM # Q
Surur,

Aside from everything else being said (I'm staying out of it, since I develop apps for almost all platforms :), I find it odd you'd say you lost admiration for Palm when you found out your IIIe had no flash ROM. But you selected the IIIe (and not the III and IIIx and IIIxe or whatever all those models were.. been too long for me to recall now :) and the IIIe's selling point was that it was cheap, because it lacked features the other III's had. ie: Why didn't you buy a III model that did have flash?

So it would seem you chose the IIIe because it was the lesser pricey model, then hold that fact against Palm? I expect your answer will be that you didn't know what difference the IIIe had to other models at the time, or that the salesman lied etc, and you didn't check sites for info at the time. If so, thats okay and is all fair.. I'm sure there realyl wasn't a lot of good information at the time, but I'm curious all the same.

I guess the broken screen didn't help much though :)

jeff

The Shadow knows!

RE: Why it's still early in the game
sr4 @ 8/15/2005 1:51:09 PM # Q

Yes, I had no idea. Like many new buyers, I know nothing of the Internet community. I just went in the store and bought the best priced unit. It was also transparent and cool looking. It did not say in the store "No Flash ROM" or "Not Updatable". If it did I would not have bought it. Even my MP3 player then (a Rio 500) had flashable firmware. I was very disappointed.

Surur

RE: Why it's still early in the game
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/15/2005 4:37:57 PM # Q
Even my MP3 player then (a Rio 500) had flashable firmware. I was very disappointed.


Funny you mention the Rio. I bought the first model they ever released and it's still working today.h

As I said before, the number of people that would have bought the Palm IIIe SE (the special edition you bought) and then flased the OS would be vanishingly small. I don't think you have a legitimate beef with Palm in this instance. In fact, did they ever advertise the ability to upgrade the OS as being a selling point with their PDAs? If anything it was just a cool bonus.


------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

RE: Why it's still early in the game
hkklife @ 8/16/2005 7:25:23 PM # Q
The IIIse was advertised as the "entry level" model and specifically lacked the flash memory of earlier models inc. the III and the expansion slot of the IIIx. If my aging memory serves me (HAH!) the IIIx had a 4-scale greyscale screen whilst the IIIe had a 16-scale screen. I think, but am not 100% certain, that this was due to the differences between OS 3.0 and 3.3 (remember, the III was a year or so older than IIIe at the time of the e's launch).

Palm was clearly positioning the IIIe under the III and trying to attract students etc. The IIIx was around too, Surur, so you shoulda just gotten that one or spent the few bucks on the III. I mean, it'd be like someone b**ching and moaning now that they bought a T|E and even though it resembles the T5, an OS update isn't available on the cheaper unit.

Upgradable firmware is NICE but by no means an essential component in my book--at least on lower-end devices. Again, Palm COULD tout a certain number of guaranteed upgrades or the capability of an upgrade as a "feature" but then they'd have to deal with clueless n00bs asking where their Cobalt upgrade is. Better to leave this sort of stuff hidden away for the power users/PIC faithful to learn about on their own.

RE: Why it's still early in the game
sr4 @ 8/16/2005 8:34:41 PM # Q

As an experienced PDA user now I obviously know more about looking out for these things. However it was my first PDA then. I had been using the PDA (which I had just bought of the shelf from my local retailer) for a few months when an OS update came out. Palm III qualified, but not the IIIe. You should remember that in UK these devices probably cost much more than in USA. I was pretty miffed to discover it was not upgradeable. It was certainly not on the box. Optical drives have updatable firmware, HDD's have firmware, phones have firmware.

The non-writable rom thing is exactly the kind of scam Palm likes to pull. All PocketPC's are mandated to have flash ROM BTW.

Surur

RE: Why it's still early in the game
hkklife @ 8/17/2005 10:13:28 AM # Q
It seems that ever since Palm started going for the low-margin, high-volume, consumer-friendly retail offerings (IIIe SE, m1xx line, Zire line) the acceptable level from the "power" user crowd has been fair to middlin'.

But then again, look at Handspring & Tapwave---some units in the have same model # would have flash ROM while other would not. Same with Handspring & Tapwave. I think the same applied some older Clies as well.

Palm is really the ONLY POS company (Handera aside) with a history of offering OS updates (and it's a sketchy past at that). IMO, they could capitalize MORE on this---sort of the same way the optical drive manufacturers (or rather, rebranded ODD marketers) and mp3 player outfits offer FREE SOFTWARE UPGRADES (bold headline on the web sits of iRiver's et al).

But given Palm's history (the m500 OS 4.0 to 4.1 upgrade only worked under win 9x & Win 2k, for example--not XP) of frying units or simply having the OS upgrade not take, you can understand their reluctance to promote flash upgradability. Then if they end up abandoning a unit like they did the T|T, they have angry customers to answer to.

I did not know that it was mandated by M$ that all WinMob devices be flashable. Any idea what the ratio is of units released vs. units being offered a flash upgrade/bugfix by their manufacturer? I might as well start paying attention to the PPC world since 9 years of POS experience is about to grind to a pitiful halt.

RE: Why it's still early in the game
sr4 @ 8/17/2005 12:43:00 PM # Q

Oh, they ALL need flash updates :( :) and they all get at least one.

OS updates are a lot more rare, e.g. 2002 to 2003 and 2003 to WM2003SE, but they do happen, and people make a lot of noise (unsuccessfully) when they do not get them.

The uproar however appears to have affected the attitude of the OEM's, and they tend to be more amenable the second time round, e.g. Toshiba who angered many people by not supplying suppling an OS upgrade from ppc2002 to 2003, but in their next model was the first to supply 2003 to WM2003SE.

The nice thing about the PPC world is that if an OEM disappoints you you can punish them by changing to another company, which is what many may people did over the years. I think Toshiba has never really recovered from the debacle from 2003, and many people swore never to use their products again (even their laptops)


Surur

Reply to this comment

Jeff's going down with the ship!

sr4 @ 8/12/2005 6:09:40 AM # Q
Jeff wrote
vrf wrote:
You should update this article now, since it's basically confirmed that the WM Treo is real.

Nonsense. No one has proved any such thing. I've seen a ton of irresponsible reporting based on the same rumors Engadget mentioned. And Palm's CFO said exactly what I'd expect a CFO would say. It did not in any way confirm anything.

http://www.solomedia.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1571&sid=3a5d1b6ea1c0660a6922f647cde8e8b1

On a more serious note, is this Palm Os Infocenter or Palm Company Infocenter. When Palm WM devices coming out, will Palminfocenter start posting WM news and software reviews etc?

Surur

RE: Jeff's going down with the ship!
LiveFaith @ 8/12/2005 11:08:26 AM # Q
RE: Jeff's going down with the ship!
twizza @ 8/12/2005 12:57:26 PM # Q
Since I cannot respond @ Jeff's forums (dont need to do another registration sequence), I'll just say this:

Since the non-announcement of the WM Treo has been basically fogured out all over the place, the only thing left for Palm to do was to deny WM Treo development. They didnt. In fact, the CFO took the position of 'we go where the money is.' That is an admission in every sense of the word, and to stand by your Palm does PalmOS only thoughts is quite illogical and very fanboy-ish.

Palm has said since the split that they would be looking at other OSes. This only confirms that they will at least use their [flagship device with its very intrenched in the big money minds of western society] Treo in another OS. They will also most likely do a Cobalt one, simply because Garnet is stretched too far. Whether a Cobat Treo fails or not has to do with market and the support of PalmSource to push the OS they want to leave behind.

In any account, Palm is doing what HP and Dell probably want to do, but cannot. I can only imagine that there would be one other manufacturer try this (Garmin and Symbol were first, but their devices are less consumer devices and more for specality markets) but PalmSource hedging if they would allow it if the WM Treo sells as well as I think it will.

mobileministrymagazine.blogspot.com
antoinerjwright.com

RE: Jeff's going down with the ship!
Admin @ 8/12/2005 2:12:30 PM # Q
I would definitely review a windows mobile Treo here should it come out. Can't say what I've got planned for the site though...

-Ryan

RE: Jeff's going down with the ship!
hkklife @ 8/12/2005 3:57:36 PM # Q
Ryan;

Any chance of you doing an editorial piece for the site prior to the official announcement of...whatever Palm's got up their sleeve?

Or maybe you write a little piece and then allow a handful of (nicely worded and polite) guest editorials debating/debunking your opinions?



RE: Jeff's going down with the ship!
ChiA @ 8/13/2005 6:00:19 AM # Q
Palm is doing what HP and Dell probably want to do, but cannot

Yea, I have to wonder why HP and Dell were never interested in licensing Palm OS. Dell is large enough to stand up for itself against Microsoft. It could have produced both WinMob and PalmOS devices. It could have sold Palms at prices which undercut PalmOne/Palm and driven them out of business. Maybe Dell decided there wasn't any need to as Palm/PalmSource have behaved in a self-destructive way anyway!

RE: Jeff's going down with the ship!
AdamaDBrown @ 8/13/2005 4:39:20 PM # Q
As for HP, Compaq virtually created the modern PocketPC with the runaway success of the iPaq h3650. The name iPaq became practically a synonym for PocketPCs for some time. HP was also a PPC manufacturer, and when the two merged, it seemed natural that they would pickup the iPaq name and keep using Windows, and they haven't moved since.

As for Dell, Michael Dell said prior to the release of the original Axim that he thought it was "too late" for Palm, and that Windows was the way to go. You're right that a $40 Zire equivalent would seem up Dell's alley, but it's possible that they didn't think it could work with their direct-sales system. After all, the large majority of low-end sales are brick and mortar.

RE: arguments and strawmen
PenguinPowered @ 8/14/2005 12:09:25 AM # Q
> As an aside, Penguin, it's pretty pathetic when you argue
> that 1985 software is better than 2005 software because it's
> not Microsoft.

It would be, if I had argued that. But since I hadn't, I hope you don't mind if I just apply a match to your strawman.


Mr. Fouts: Trollin', trollin', trollin'... RAWHIDE!
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/14/2005 4:13:36 PM # Q
It would be, if I had argued that. But since I hadn't, I hope you don't mind if I just apply a match to your strawman.

Be careful playing with fire, Marty. Since you showed up here you've already been scorched on several occasions. At this rate I expect to see you on a pyre doused in gasolene pretty soon.

Your outlandish posts and delusional hatred of Microsoft expose you to be the biggest troll of all. Congrats to you, Troll Of The Year, 2005! Isn't she lovely, Folks?

We'll leave your TOTY Tiara on your desk next week.

TVoR


------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

Reply to this comment

Looking forward to 2007....

hgoldner @ 8/12/2005 10:16:35 AM # Q
Of course, none of the carriers will actually CARRY the device until 2007, right?

H.

RE: Looking forward to 2007....
souterj @ 8/12/2005 10:46:00 AM # Q
Yeah - especially here in the UK... the Treo 650 has only been here a few weeks and only on a restricted number of carriers.

Hopefully the new Palm office in Ireland will help to speed the testing process up and help us European folk get our hands on new Treos more quickly.

The Treo 670 is only a few months off and the Treo 600 is still Palm's dominant (ok... only!) handset on the shelves in most telecom stores.

MAD!


KultiVator

If the cap fits... wear it!
If the sh*t sticks... throw it!
If the Palm clicks... you've probably forgotten to turn 'Keylock' on.


Reply to this comment

Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:

The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/13/2005 7:59:34 AM # Q
Now that people finally realize the Windows Mobile Treos are coming soon, the rationalizations we're seeing from Palm Apologists have reached new depths. It's amazing these people can say what they do with a straight face. Some of the posters (like "PenguinPowered" who I revealed to be a PalmSource employee that actually deals with their PalmLinux implementation) have a financial interest in Palm/PalmSource, so it's obvious why they contine to pretend everything is OK, much like the Iraqi Foreign Minister did despite multiple explosions occurring all around them.

What the Palm Apologists continue to ignore is one simple question: WHY would any user or IT department choose PalmOS over Windows Mobile NOW, given the advantages of Windows Mobile over PalmOS: multitasking; runs WinMob apps and can run PalmOS apps using StyleTap Platform; better file management; free "push" email with Windows Exchange; better browsers available; familiar Microsoft name (yes that matters to a LOT of companies!); much better/less expensive hardware; host USB available; etc, etc. I can't come up with any reason why people will stay.

Palm choosing Windows Mobile over their "own" PalmOS will be seen as a vote of non-confidence in PalmOS, undermining confidence in the platform's future. Those who pretend otherwise are either ignorant or liars, to put it bluntly. It appears that the end of PalmOS is approaching and the platform's demise is about to be catalysed by Palm's desperation to make a quick buck by hitching their sorry a$$ onto the Windows Mobile Bandwagon - just as I predicted.

If PalmSource intends to recover, they simply MUST correct the following deficiencies in the coming months, otherwise PalmOS marketshare will probably plummet to Netscape levels by 2007:

1) Real Multitasking™. Even the ability to run just TWO apps a time would be a HUGE improvement. Wirelessly connected devices that can't multitask make as much sense as a car with square wheels.

2) Bulletproof security. Licensing TealLock would be the best way to quickly add security to PalmOS, since Palm lacks the engineering ability to code anything even half as good. Positioning PalmOS devices as business tools (smart marketing angle, as RIM has proved) means you need robust security for obvious reasons.

3) Properly implemented NVFS support. I feel NVFS (CrapRAM™) is a step backward, but if you're going to use it at least make sure your devices don't choke on it. Palm now has tarnished its reputation for stability by rushing a series of buggy tweaked versions of PalmOS 5 onto the market. [Data "Mangler"/incompatible PIM databases, NVFS bug, Tungsten T 3 SD card toasting, unstable VersaMail, unstable LifeDrive memory architecture, "Find" bug... each new problem further undermines Palm's legacy. Now it's Windows Mobile users' turn to laugh...]

4) Host USB ability (like the LOOX 720). Long overdue flexibility. Finally use your PDA as a true extension of your desktop.

5) A proper filesystem. 'Nuff said.

6) Bug-free implementation of current Bluetooth (all profiles) and Wi-Fi protocols. Again, fairly self-evident.

7) A built-in backup application. Why does my 1999 TRGpro have a backup app but even the latest Palms lack one? And these are supposed to be devices we trust our data to? Get serious.

8) Proper support for Mac. Alienate the Mac Cultists and prepare for a PR-damaging whine and chese party not worth the cost of licencing The Missing Sync for those 208 remaining Palm owners that also use Macs.

9) Push email. Fail to make it easy to set up and you can kiss any hope of sustained business sales of PalmOS Treos once Microsoft brings out it's own MS Exchange support. Visualize a Sprint Treo 700 running Windows Mobile and StyleTap™ Platform and ask yourself why ANY business customers would choose the PalmOS version of the Treo.

10) Bug-free standard apps: email program, video player (+ simple encoder), MP3 player, advanced browser (license NetFront). It's kinda hard to make a convincing case for your platform if you can't even ship a modern set of apps with the OS.

Based on what I know about PalmSource and its internal problems, achieving these goals within the time they have remaining before the market gives up on the platform is beyond their capabilities. PalmSource will wither on the vine and then be bought by Palm at a firesale price, concluding the final act in this tragedy. Well done, Palm/PalmSource! You're following my script exactly. The next step in a few weeks will be PalmSource's announcement of a horrible quarter which - combined with the announcement of WinMob Treos - will trigger the acceleration of PalmSource's death spiral. Palm certainly has played a LOT of people for fools, as the latest $30 million "gift" to PalmSource underscored.

As usual with the Palm Apologists, when the truth is revealed, the silence will be deafening.




TVoR


------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
fierywater @ 8/14/2005 1:12:16 AM # Q
Well said by my favorite troll on these boards.

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
PenguinPowered @ 8/14/2005 3:52:05 AM # Q
Poor TVoR. Confused again. I have no financial interest in Palm, nor PalmSource. Nor, on this forum, nor elsewhere, have I "pretended everything is OK."

Why would a user opt for PalmOS over WinMobile now? Because they like the Treo650 and don't feel like waiting until the rumored Treo670 is available from their carrier, I suppose. This would explain why Palm had such a good quarter with the 650 last quarter.

1) Believe it or not, Linux does have multitasking. I would be terribly surprised if PalmSource didn't take advantage of that.

2) No one has bullet-proof security, although RIM's quality is a good target to shoot for. I suppose PalmSource is aware of this. Will Linux help them get there? So say the Linux TrueBelievers.

3) No one has a good non-volatile story for phone devices; especially those relying heavily on NAND flash. Again, though, Linux (through MTD) has a pretty good story. I would be suprised if PalmSource hasn't done something about that.

4) Host USB. Now that's an interesting one. For a phone to support Host USB, it would have to be USB On-The-Go. It's early days for that. Try going to Frys or Radioshack and buying USB OTG cables. Not very popular. But, surprise, surprise, Linux does have USB OTG support. Early days, but it's there. By the name there's market penetration, Linux support will be mature.

5) Proper file systems are good. I'm a big fan of them. Did research on file system design years ago. Linux has a wealth of file systems to select from. Some, like JFFS2, are optimized for NOR flash. Others, like YAFFS2 are optimized for NAND flash. Most, like EXT2/3 and REISERFS are optimized for rotational media. Even has support for M$ filesystems for things like MMC cards. I'd look for PalmSource to support and enhance file systems that are tuned to the media.

6) Bluetooth's amusing. Security hole bigger than TVoR's ego. Nobody has a good implementation of it, and the carriers do stupid things like turning it off or reducing the profiles supported to the lamest possible level. Still, there's BlueZ. It might well mature enough to be usable. It's a fad, not a make/break marketing item.

7) Backup is good. No idea if PalmSource has a plan for that one. Linux won't help them there. (It's just a kernel after all.)

8) Even Apple has abandoned the Mac true believers. Sure, they whine. But they don't influence any important buying decisions. Mac support is just not interesting in the phone business.

9) I'm still laughing over the idea of using "easy" and "exchange" in the same sentence without a negation.

10) It's a good thing you hold PalmSource to higher standards than you hold Microsoft. "bug free" goes with "app" in about the same way that "fast" goes with "snail".

I could probably put together a list of ten things PalmSource needs to do to survive that would have a lot more in common with reality than yours, but if I did, I think I'd share it with PalmSource.

They need to stay the course, execute, and deliver.

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
Sam H @ 8/14/2005 7:32:12 AM # Q
Based on what I know about PalmSource and its internal problems, achieving these goals within the time they have remaining before the market gives up on the platform is beyond their capabilities. PalmSource will wither on the vine and then be bought by Palm at a firesale price, concluding the final act in this tragedy.

Maybe Palm should then open source Palm OS, following the Nokia/Maemo model. They wouldn't have much to lose, and potentially a great deal to gain.

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/14/2005 2:02:10 PM # Q
Poor TVoR. Confused again. I have no financial interest in Palm, nor PalmSource. Nor, on this forum, nor elsewhere, have I "pretended everything is OK."

Keep up with the denials, Marty. Eventually someone will believe you. Please explain how you "have no financial interest in... PalmSource" if they are paying you money to work for them. Your actions here are getting sleazier and sleazier the longer you attempt to keep up this charade. I suppose at this point you feel you've gone too far to start telling the truth.

Why would a user opt for PalmOS over WinMobile now? Because they like the Treo650 and don't feel like waiting until the rumored Treo670 is available from their carrier, I suppose. This would explain why Palm had such a good quarter with the 650 last quarter.

That is the ONLY reason I can see for buying a PalmOS phone now. Please try to remember that (despite your bias) not all portable devices are smartphones. Palm still sells something called a PDA and we here at Palminfocenter still discuss these devices. The PalmOS Treo sales are likely going to get a rude awakening in a few months when the Windows Mobile Treos are announced.

1) Believe it or not, Linux does have multitasking. I would be terribly surprised if PalmSource didn't take advantage of that.

Yes, we know. But last time I checked, PalmLinux did not exist on any shipping devices. In fact, PalmLinux is BARELY into development and is currently trying to overcome a few potentially showstopping problems.

2) No one has bullet-proof security, although RIM's quality is a good target to shoot for. I suppose PalmSource is aware of this. Will Linux help them get there? So say the Linux TrueBelievers.

I don't have much faith in PalmSource providing good security given their/Palm's extremely poor track record. How many times have they had the opportunity to fix the problems but took the lazy way out and did nothing? In the meantime, an app called TealLock could have been incorporated to give users robust security, but again PalmSource/Palm left it up to consumers to roll their own solution. A remote phone wiper was also not included for the Treos even though this could have been easily added. For years apps like pCrack, NotSync, No Security, etc made a mockery of Palm's so-called "security". Palm's response time makes "evil" Microsoft look like a saint.

3) No one has a good non-volatile story for phone devices; especially those relying heavily on NAND flash. Again, though, Linux (through MTD) has a pretty good story. I would be suprised if PalmSource hasn't done something about that.

Again, we're not just talking about PHONES here. Got it? PalmSource has fixed several of the NVFS bugs (which should have never happened in the first place) but more work needs to be done. Again, given PalmSource's/Palm's exceptionally sloppy record with regards to new code (will "Data Mangler" EVER be fixed?; guess not), I expect an overwhelming number of bugs with anything they release from now on. If more tested/proven/stable alternatives exist, why would a user PAY Palm for the honor of being their beta tester? Answer: they won't. Right now people have stuck with PalmOS because of inertia, preferring the PalmOS UI over PPC's, investment in apps, ignorance, wanting Treo hardware, irrational dislike of Microsoft, tradition/faithfulness. Palm has pushed it's users' patience to the brink (and now that the WinMob Treos are coming + StyleTap is here, OVER the brink in many cases).

4) Host USB. Now that's an interesting one. For a phone to support Host USB, it would have to be USB On-The-Go. It's early days for that. Try going to Frys or Radioshack and buying USB OTG cables. Not very popular. But, surprise, surprise, Linux does have USB OTG support. Early days, but it's there. By the name there's market penetration, Linux support will be mature.

Again, we're not just talking phones. And again, PalmLinux does not yet exist. And again you seem to be agreeing with my list.

5) Proper file systems are good. I'm a big fan of them. Did research on file system design years ago. Linux has a wealth of file systems to select from. Some, like JFFS2, are optimized for NOR flash. Others, like YAFFS2 are optimized for NAND flash. Most, like EXT2/3 and REISERFS are optimized for rotational media. Even has support for M$ filesystems for things like MMC cards. I'd look for PalmSource to support and enhance file systems that are tuned to the media.

We'll believe it when we see it.

6) Bluetooth's amusing. Security hole bigger than TVoR's ego. Nobody has a good implementation of it, and the carriers do stupid things like turning it off or reducing the profiles supported to the lamest possible level. Still, there's BlueZ. It might well mature enough to be usable. It's a fad, not a make/break marketing item.

My ego is almost as big as you say it is, but at least I can back it up. You, on the other hand, have no excuse. From what I hear, Bluetooth is a big deal in Europe. Does Palm still want to sell devices in Europe or have they given up there as well?

7) Backup is good. No idea if PalmSource has a plan for that one. Linux won't help them there. (It's just a kernel after all.)

If PalmSource has no plans to include a backup app in an OS desidned for MOBILE devices, it's time for them to get out of the business.

8) Even Apple has abandoned the Mac true believers. Sure, they whine. But they don't influence any important buying decisions. Mac support is just not interesting in the phone business.

Apple more or less died sometime in the mid 1990s but the demographics of their few remaining customers would make most manufacturers drool. Abandoning this type of (sensitive, easily-offended, grudge-carrying) customer probably does NOT make good business sense.

9) I'm still laughing over the idea of using "easy" and "exchange" in the same sentence without a negation.

Please try to get over your (unbalanced) hatred of all things Microsoft. Exchange has a HUGE user base and most of those companies must be pretty happy with it or else they wouldn't still be using it. Add the benefits of "free" push email and the dumping of the "proprietary", expensive RIM solution and suddenly Microsoft has leveraged one of its products by increasing interoperability. (I wonder how long it will take for Lawsuits In Motion to sue Microsoft for so-called "anticompetitive" practices?)

10) It's a good thing you hold PalmSource to higher standards than you hold Microsoft. "bug free" goes with "app" in about the same way that "fast" goes with "snail".

These days both the standard and 3rd party "core" apps available for Windows Mobile appear to be "better" than their Palm equivalents. Try doing a relatively impartial comparison and maybe you'll see for yourself.

I could probably put together a list of ten things PalmSource needs to do to survive that would have a lot more in common with reality than yours, but if I did, I think I'd share it with PalmSource.

Yes, PalmSource is definitely getting their money's worth by hiring you, Marty.

They need to stay the course, execute, and deliver.

Gee, really?

TVoR




------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/14/2005 3:21:50 PM # Q
Poor TVoR. Confused again. I have no financial interest in Palm, nor PalmSource. Nor, on this forum, nor elsewhere, have I "pretended everything is OK."

Keep up with the denials, Marty. Eventually someone will believe you. Please explain how you "have no financial interest in... PalmSource" if they are paying you money to work for them. Your actions here are getting sleazier and sleazier the longer you attempt to keep up this charade. I suppose at this point you feel you've gone too far to start telling the truth.

Why would a user opt for PalmOS over WinMobile now? Because they like the Treo650 and don't feel like waiting until the rumored Treo670 is available from their carrier, I suppose. This would explain why Palm had such a good quarter with the 650 last quarter.

That is the ONLY reason I can see for buying a PalmOS phone now. Please try to remember that (despite your bias) not all portable devices are smartphones. Palm still sells something called a PDA and we here at Palminfocenter still discuss these devices. The PalmOS Treo sales are likely going to get a rude awakening in a few months when the Windows Mobile Treos are announced.

1) Believe it or not, Linux does have multitasking. I would be terribly surprised if PalmSource didn't take advantage of that.

Yes, we know. But last time I checked, PalmLinux did not exist on any shipping devices. In fact, PalmLinux is BARELY into development and is currently trying to overcome a few potentially showstopping problems.

2) No one has bullet-proof security, although RIM's quality is a good target to shoot for. I suppose PalmSource is aware of this. Will Linux help them get there? So say the Linux TrueBelievers.

I don't have much faith in PalmSource providing good security given their/Palm's extremely poor track record. How many times have they had the opportunity to fix the problems but took the lazy way out and did nothing? In the meantime, an app called TealLock could have been incorporated to give users robust security, but again PalmSource/Palm left it up to consumers to roll their own solution. A remote phone wiper was also not included for the Treos even though this could have been easily added. For years apps like pCrack, NotSync, No Security, etc made a mockery of Palm's so-called "security". Palm's response time makes "evil" Microsoft look like a saint.

3) No one has a good non-volatile story for phone devices; especially those relying heavily on NAND flash. Again, though, Linux (through MTD) has a pretty good story. I would be suprised if PalmSource hasn't done something about that.

Again, we're not just talking about PHONES here. Got it? PalmSource has fixed several of the NVFS bugs (which should have never happened in the first place) but more work needs to be done. Again, given PalmSource's/Palm's exceptionally sloppy record with regards to new code (will "Data Mangler" EVER be fixed?; guess not), I expect an overwhelming number of bugs with anything they release from now on. If more tested/proven/stable alternatives exist, why would a user PAY Palm for the honor of being their beta tester? Answer: they won't. Right now people have stuck with PalmOS because of inertia, preferring the PalmOS UI over PPC's, investment in apps, ignorance, wanting Treo hardware, irrational dislike of Microsoft, tradition/faithfulness. Palm has pushed it's users' patience to the brink (and now that the WinMob Treos are coming + StyleTap is here, OVER the brink in many cases).

4) Host USB. Now that's an interesting one. For a phone to support Host USB, it would have to be USB On-The-Go. It's early days for that. Try going to Frys or Radioshack and buying USB OTG cables. Not very popular. But, surprise, surprise, Linux does have USB OTG support. Early days, but it's there. By the name there's market penetration, Linux support will be mature.

Again, we're not just talking phones. And again, PalmLinux does not yet exist. And again you seem to be agreeing with my list.

5) Proper file systems are good. I'm a big fan of them. Did research on file system design years ago. Linux has a wealth of file systems to select from. Some, like JFFS2, are optimized for NOR flash. Others, like YAFFS2 are optimized for NAND flash. Most, like EXT2/3 and REISERFS are optimized for rotational media. Even has support for M$ filesystems for things like MMC cards. I'd look for PalmSource to support and enhance file systems that are tuned to the media.

We'll believe it when we see it.

6) Bluetooth's amusing. Security hole bigger than TVoR's ego. Nobody has a good implementation of it, and the carriers do stupid things like turning it off or reducing the profiles supported to the lamest possible level. Still, there's BlueZ. It might well mature enough to be usable. It's a fad, not a make/break marketing item.

My ego is almost as big as you say it is, but at least I can back it up. You, on the other hand, have no excuse. From what I hear, Bluetooth is a big deal in Europe. Does Palm still want to sell devices in Europe or have they given up there as well?

7) Backup is good. No idea if PalmSource has a plan for that one. Linux won't help them there. (It's just a kernel after all.)

If PalmSource has no plans to include a backup app in an OS desidned for MOBILE devices, it's time for them to get out of the business.

8) Even Apple has abandoned the Mac true believers. Sure, they whine. But they don't influence any important buying decisions. Mac support is just not interesting in the phone business.

Apple more or less died sometime in the mid 1990s but the demographics of their few remaining customers would make most manufacturers drool. Abandoning this type of (sensitive, easily-offended, grudge-carrying) customer probably does NOT make good business sense.

9) I'm still laughing over the idea of using "easy" and "exchange" in the same sentence without a negation.

Please try to get over your (unbalanced) hatred of all things Microsoft. Exchange has a HUGE user base and most of those companies must be pretty happy with it or else they wouldn't still be using it. Add the benefits of "free" push email and the dumping of the "proprietary", expensive RIM solution and suddenly Microsoft has leveraged one of its products by increasing interoperability. (I wonder how long it will take for Lawsuits In Motion to sue Microsoft for so-called "anticompetitive" practices?)

10) It's a good thing you hold PalmSource to higher standards than you hold Microsoft. "bug free" goes with "app" in about the same way that "fast" goes with "snail".

These days both the standard and 3rd party "core" apps available for Windows Mobile appear to be "better" than their Palm equivalents. Try doing a relatively impartial comparison and maybe you'll see for yourself.

I could probably put together a list of ten things PalmSource needs to do to survive that would have a lot more in common with reality than yours, but if I did, I think I'd share it with PalmSource.

Yes, PalmSource is definitely getting their money's worth by hiring you, Marty. And Microsoft is evil incarnate, right?

They need to stay the course, execute, and deliver.

Gee, really?

TVoR




------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/16/2005 12:36:52 AM # Q
Poor Marty...


------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
PenguinPowered @ 8/16/2005 2:44:34 AM # Q
> Please explain how you "have no financial interest in... PalmSource"
> if they are paying you money to work for them.

Poor TVoR. Using terms he doesn't understand. "financial interest" doesn't mean what you seem to think it means. I have no financial interest in PalmSource. I have no financial relationship of any sort with Palm, despite your earlier assertion.

> Please try to remember that not all portable devices are
> smartphones.

If you record an mp3 of that, I'll stick it on my iRiver.

> Palm still sells something called a PDA and we here at
> Palminfocenter still discuss these devices.

That's nice. But in _this_ thread, you were discussing PalmOS, not Palm. Besides, you need to keep your stories straight. You've already agreed that the PDA was dead. Let's stop looking backwards, shall we?

> The PalmOS Treo sales are likely going to get a rude awakening in a
> few months when the Windows Mobile Treos are announced.

"few"? I guess that depends on your definition of 'few'. Even the rumors have the winmobile treo more than a few months away. As for which treo sales do well, we'll have to see when and if this winmobile device ever makes it to market.

> last time I checked, PalmLinux did not exist on any shipping
> devices. In fact, PalmLinux is BARELY into development and is
> currently trying to overcome a few potentially showstopping
> problems.

Poor TvoR, confused again. You really need to get better sources at PalmSource. PalmLinux was demo-ed at the Devcon, and has, one would presume, been in development since. The two bits that it is composed of, Cobalt, and Linux, have both been in development for years. The only thing that's "barely" in development would be integrating the two, and in that case, "barely" is now about six months, if my aging memory serves me correctly.

> I don't have much faith in PalmSource providing good security given
> their/Palm's extremely poor track record.

did you notice that M$ just discovered three brand new critical
security problems in xp? You really only have to do barely better than that to be successful.

> Again, we're not just talking about PHONES here.

Phones are where the interesting bugs are in nonvolatile
solutions. It's harder to do well on phones than on classic PDAs.

> Again, we're not just talking phones. And again, PalmLinux does not
> yet exist. And again you seem to be agreeing with my list.

It's funny that you keep claiming that PalmLinux doesn't exist, even though it was demo-ed at Devcon, but keep going on about a supposed m$ treo that neither HTC nor Palm will admit to, as if it was shipping soon. Almost as funny as your anonmity coupled with your obsession with other people's ids.

But in this case, (USB otg) everything I said about phones applies equally to PDAs.

> We'll believe it (filesystem support) when we see it.

Check kernel.org. All of the filesystems I mentioned are there,
except YAFFS2, for which, see aleph1. You can see it now.

> My ego is almost as big as you say it is, but at least I can back it
> up. You, on the other hand, have no excuse. From what I hear,
> Bluetooth is a big deal in Europe. Does Palm still want to sell
> devices in Europe or have they given up there as well?

Have no idea where all Palm wants to sell devices. But given how accurate what you hear has turned out to be on other stuff, I'd not give much credence to what you "hear" about bluetooth in europe.

> Please try to get over your (unbalanced) hatred of all things
> Microsoft.

I don't hate anything m$, other that the various business practices that they indulge in that have been demonstrated illegal in court.

> Exchange has a HUGE user base and most of those companies must be
> pretty happy with it or else they wouldn't still be using it.

"happy with" and "find easy" are wildly different things. No
companies are finding exchange all that easy to use or deploy, and few are happy with the amount of resources it takes to manage it.

> These days both the standard and 3rd party "core" apps available for
> Windows Mobile appear to be "better" than their Palm equivalents. Try
> doing a relatively impartial comparison and maybe you'll see for
> yourself.

Well, "better than" is hardly "bug free", but rather than take your word for it, I think I'll wait and see what the market decides. It's hard for me to imagine that m$ will do any better on winmobile than they do on win/xp, and win/xp is classic buggy software.

> And Microsoft is evil incarnate, right?

Nope. But it's a drag on innovation and it has a long well documented track record of illegal monopolistic practices.

OK, try to stay focused here. You asserted that you had a list of 10 things that PalmOS "MUST fix to survive" (your emphasis). I merely pointed out that a bunch of those things are already fixed, that no one has fixes for some of them, and that others aren't as important as you make out.

I think you're wrong about "push" email, but that if you're right, the solution will come out of the telecoms and not out of traditional email.

I don't know if you're wrong or not about backup, but it's rare that OS vendors provide it in other spaces, so I'm not surprised that the current situation has people using third party backup.

The rest of what you brought up is either already fixed in whatever they'll end up calling Cobalt + Linux, or is no worse in that than it is in any of the competitors.


RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
sr4 @ 8/16/2005 3:29:52 AM # Q
This just brings up an interesting point. If MS is such a drag on technology, I wonder what amazing technology could be developed independently of them. As an independently developed OS for the last 10 years, what innovation has Palm OS brought to the market?

Surur

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
PenguinPowered @ 8/16/2005 4:25:51 AM # Q
brought to market? graffiti.

you'd have to ask someone else what innovations thare are in PalmOS. Most of it would have to do with UI and GUI stuff, and that's not my area.

I've already mentioned some things that have been around the research community for at least 25 years that still can't be found in m$ products, like the the ide from smalltalk-80. (Even apple screwed up when they ripped off smalltalk for the first mac. too bad they never put back the stuff they couldn't afford on the hardware they started with.)

There are at least two good models of what are called Single Address Space OSes that have been around for 20 years that result in simpler distributed programming than whatever-m$-is-calling-com-this-month. Good work was done on that by a company called Apollo, which was swallowed up by HP more than fifteen years ago.

The Multics security model is still much better than any security model m$ has come up with and it's almost forty years old.

m$ hasn't even begun to cope with hierarchical storage and storage migration. Much of the state-of-the art in that field is where IBM left it 20 years ago, although SANs are making that more interesting.

m$ has contributed nothing to OO, and has been slow to adapt and adopt it, and usually screw it up, which is part of why com-and-its-many-successors is such a painful model to program to and why they keep redesigning them. (If the rumors are true, I feel sorry for the people who climbed the .net curve when they get longhorn.)

they have done a good job with RDC. it's probably the only thing of value in XP, but it certainly makes detachable computing a lot nicer.

C# can be added to C++ and Algol68 as an example of a language that's predecessor was an improvement over.

and so on.



RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
ChiA @ 8/16/2005 4:25:55 AM # Q
Penguinpowered, what is your definition of financial interest? I'm curious. If someone works for a company and is paid for their work then that's a financial interest, even if they're a contractor or consultant who's not an employee of the company.

You've not totally denied any association between yourself and PalmSource so there are one of three possibilities which are inferred:

1. You work for PalmSource for free.
2. You work for a company which provides services to Palmsource - hence no direct financial interest between yourself and PalmSource.
3. You work for a regulatory agency e.g. the FCC.

"What counts is not necessarily the size of the dog in the fight but the size of the fight in the dog" - Dwight D. Eisenhower

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
PenguinPowered @ 8/16/2005 4:49:04 AM # Q
> Penguinpowered, what is your definition of financial
> interest?

If my aging memory serves me correctly, the same one the tax code uses.

> I'm curious. If someone works for a company and is paid for
> their work then that's a financial interest, even if they're
> a contractor or consultant who's not an employee of the
> company.

If I recall the tax code correctly, that's a financial relationship. Any supplier to a company has a financial relationship with that company. So do its customers. It is owners and investors that have a financial interest. (Hmm... had TVoR used the phrase "significant financial interest" and had I been a researcher, doing federally funded research, I'd have to amend that observation to include salaries, since the federal disclosure rules for researchers are different than the tax code. Interesting; but since i'm not a researcher, irrelevant.)

> You've not totally denied any association between yourself
> and PalmSource so there are one of three possibilities which
> are inferred:

> 1. You work for PalmSource for free.

> 2. You work for a company which provides services to
> Palmsource - hence no direct financial interest between
> yourself and PalmSource.

> 3. You work for a regulatory agency e.g. the FCC.

Oh dear no. There are many ways one can have an association beyond the above. A licensee has an association. Anyone who is bound by an NDA has an association. One who is related to someone who has an association might have an association. TVoR claims to have sources at PalmSource. That's an association, although given the quality of TVoR's information, one doubts that it's a very useful one.

But it's worse than that. I've never admitted to being who TVoR claims I am. Perhaps I am. Perhaps I am not.

You left out 4., by the way:

4. I am no more inclined than anyone else who posts here under an alias to deny or confirm a third party's claims about my identity.

Judge what I say here by the merits of the arguments. If the statements can't stand on their own merits, ignore them. If they can, it doesn't matter who said them.

Oh, and I think I've made it clear, but just in case I haven't, I find TVoR's obsession with other people's identities very amusing. So please excuse me if I am coy in dealing with that obsession.

I will say that other than answering one question differently than TVoR seems to now think it was asking about my identity, I've been completely up front here. It's too bad we have different definitions of "financial interest".

By the way, you will notice, if my aging memory serves me correctly, I've said nothing specific about PalmSource or PalmLinux that's not well known to anyone who attended the PalmLinux demo at the DevCon. Unlike TVoR, I am not relying on insider information of dubious quality.



RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
sr4 @ 8/16/2005 4:58:55 AM # Q

I know there are more innovative technologies around, but I do not see why its MS's responsiblity to bring it to market. MS did not kill Appolo, and MS did not make Apple drop SmallTalk. If these techologies were so great, why did they not survice in the market? Could it be that they were more complicated and/or expensive to implement?

If the other actual commercial OS's do not implement these stuff, why blame MS? The Newton was apparently quite innovative, but was superceded by a much simpler OS, the Palm OS. Wasnt the Next OS quite amazing in its modularity, but was still a comercial disaster?

You clearly expect MS to take the buying public and developers on a wild ride, implementing every new paradigm that pops up in academia. Business users however prefer things change very slowly, and this is the primary market MS serves.

As I'm writing this I am actually feeling like a MS apologist, which I am not. I am just saying that there is OS competition, and if the other people did not implement the amazing new tech (or did and then died) it must imply that these ideas were at the very least ahead of their time, or did not add enough value for the people who were supposed to buy them, compared to simpler and cheaper competitors.

Surur

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
PenguinPowered @ 8/16/2005 5:30:13 AM # Q
OK, let me slow it down some more for you.

No, I don't expect m$ to implement every academic whim. The point I was making is that since m$ has established a monoply, those academic and industrial research efforts that have panned out are taking much longer to reach customers than they did before. m$ will eventually make the IDE for visual studio as powerful and useful as the one from smalltalk was 25 years ago. The diference is that without healthy competition, they'll take much longer to do it than if such competition existed. That's the drag that monopolies put on innovation.

In the case of the m$ monopoly, there's more than just drag, though. If you study the history of some of these technologies, they were directly killed by m$. In some cases, m$ bought the competitor rather than competing. That's stifled innovation. In others, m$ strong-armed customers into not using the competition's technology. That's stifled innovation (and has been demonstrated in a court of law to be true.) Finally, coming back to your point about standards, m$ has killed competition precisely by yanking the rug out from under its defacto standards just as competitors were able to cope with them.

There isn't viable OS competition in the general purpose marketplace. Hasn't been for a decade. Hasn't been in PCs for even longer. There's Linux, which is busy reimplementing and catching up with Unix, and is now hobbled by people trying to make it have a gui just like windows on the desktop. There's a number of legacy unix implementations, all of whom's vendors are trying to get out from under the burden. There's the freeware Unix implementations, each with its own tiny niche in which it does well, but from which it will never break out.

It's a lot like OSes were back in the 60s and early 70s, when the trade press wrote about "IBM and the seven dwarfs." Nobody took the dwarfs seriously and IBM was able to completly control the rate of introduction of innovation into the market, slowing it dramatically to milk the maximum profit out of each feature. M$ is becoming like that in the general purpose OS space now.

In the late 70s, a trend in systems hardware created a vacuum that IBM didn't feel the need to fill. It took 20 years, but by the late 90s, IBM didn't control the OS market, and barely controlled the (dying) mainframe market. They had to reinvent themselves as a professional services company to stay in business.

Unfortunately, there's no similar trend now. Innovation in OSes has all but ended, and all we're doing is fitting the features to smaller devices as they become cheap/fast enough to allow it to happen. That's all winmobile is, a fitting of windoze to smaller devices.

It makes me a lot of money, but after living through the heady periods I find it sad.

And no, m$ doesn't carry the blame alone. They're responsible for some horrendous business practices, but there's a whole economics of hardware that's been a major contributor. m$ would be just another dwarf to IBM's domination if the the PC hadn't taken off the way it did when it did, or if IBM had managed to understand it in time.

It's also sad to see PDAs turn from funky quirky devices into mini-pcs with phones attached.


RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
twrock @ 8/16/2005 10:08:43 AM # Q
Judge what I say here by the merits of the arguments. If the statements can't stand on their own merits, ignore them. If they can, it doesn't matter who said them.

Yes, thank you.

Can we drop this part of the conversation already? What is the obsession with trying to discredit PenguinPowered based on some perceived "relationship" to Palm? WHO CARES! (Yes, I recognize that some people must care very deeply about this matter, so I'm sorry for hurting your feelings, but you really should just get over it.)

(Disclosure: Everything I have ever written on PalmInfocenter should be judged on the fact that I have purchased a large number of third-party Palm apps over the years, so I have a significant financial investment in Palm.)

I'm still waiting for the mythical "color HandEra."

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
sr4 @ 8/16/2005 12:38:34 PM # Q

I'm sure the whole thing is terribly boring to most people in any case.

Back on topic then.

For POS to survive they need to implement a robust kernel, and implement a good Java environment, which will automatically make them compatible (if they do it right) with a lot of Nokia and SE software.

They did say they wanted to be a phone OS company, did they not?

Surur

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
PenguinPowered @ 8/16/2005 2:57:40 PM # Q
They're definitely on the path to a robust kernel. Java is debatable. IMO it'll be a few years before phones with enough horsepower to run java well will be affordable.



RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
AdamaDBrown @ 8/16/2005 4:12:49 PM # Q
It's funny that you keep claiming that PalmLinux doesn't exist, even though it was demo-ed at Devcon, but keep going on about a supposed m$ treo that neither HTC nor Palm will admit to, as if it was shipping soon.

I've got to agree with TVoR's definition. In practice, a thing isn't real until someone has gotten their hands on it. In theory, PalmLinux is real. In theory, Cobalt has been out for 20 months. But in theory, you can also scibble on a ****tail napkin and call it a system design. The PalmLinux "demo" at DevCon was mildly interesting from a news standpoint, but it proves nothing about an actual, viable platform. Remember that PalmSource was originally talking about having PalmLinux to licensees by the end of this year. Now it's scheduled for late 2006.

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
PenguinPowered @ 8/16/2005 5:52:57 PM # Q
That's all fine. Now apply the same rule to the _rumored_ phone. At least PalmLinux has been demo-ed.

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
Gekko @ 8/16/2005 6:06:01 PM # Q

PSRC does not have the talent nor the leadership to succeed at this point. Without talent and leadership, there's no way they will be able to get themselves out of the big black hole they dug themselves into. Even near-term survival would be a miracle. Can you smell the cash burning??? Time is running out.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?t=2y&s=PSRC&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=



RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
Rome @ 8/16/2005 6:24:03 PM # Q
Just want to drop in and say that I truly enjoy reading your posts, PenquinPowered.

You make Palm Infocenter readable again. Thanks for posting.

Time to snuff out all the BULL
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/16/2005 9:45:23 PM # Q
I've got to agree with TVoR's definition. In practice, a thing isn't real until someone has gotten their hands on it. In theory, PalmLinux is real. In theory, Cobalt has been out for 20 months. But in theory, you can also scibble on a ****tail napkin and call it a system design. The PalmLinux "demo" at DevCon was mildly interesting from a news standpoint, but it proves nothing about an actual, viable platform. Remember that PalmSource was originally talking about having PalmLinux to licensees by the end of this year. Now it's scheduled for late 2006.


This thread has certainly taken a Penguin Powered ridiculous turn. Marty appears to have been schooled in the arts of deception, misdirection and obfuscation by PalmSource's PhD of FUD ("FUD FUD"?), Michael Mace. Since he insists on pressing the issue, let's ask a few questions, shall we?

1) When was Cobalt (PalmOS 6) development started? [2001-02]
2) When PalmOS 5 was released in Summer, 2002 was it expected to be a temporary (1 to 2 years, MAX) kludge solution, merely to migrate PalmOS to ARM processors? [Yes]
3) When was Cobalt announced as being completed + shipped to licensees? [December, 2003]
4) When was the "real" Cobalt (version 6.1) released? [September, 2004]
5) When did PalmSource announce it would be working on PalmLinux and also acquire China MobileSoft? [December, 2004]
6) When did PalmSource finally announce they are essentially pulling the plug on development of all non-PalmLinux OSes? (McVeigh: "We are delaying all development of products not directly related to [PalmLinux]." [July, 2005]
7) Have ANY Cobalt devices been released thus far (as of August, 2005)? [No]


Soooooooooooooo...

8) Did PalmSource pull a smoke and mirrors trick at DevCon and try to make it look like PalmLinux development is going smoothly and is fairly advanced? (Taking a page out of Apple's book of tricks!) [Yes]
9) Does a STABLE version of PalmLinux exist? [No]
10) Will ANY Cobalt devices EVER be released? [Yes]
11) How long will it take for PalmSource to complete and ship a REAL (i.e. STABLE!) PalmLinux? [Until 2007]
12) Will any PalmLinux devices ever be released? [?]

TVoR


Sorry, Marty, but your FUD is not fooling anyone. People aren't blind. PalmSource can fool some of the people some of the time, but they can't fool all of the people all of the time.


------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

PalmLinux, Cobalt, Copeland, BeOS. Are they related?
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/16/2005 10:34:04 PM # Q
That's all fine. Now apply the same rule to the _rumored_ phone. At least PalmLinux has been demo-ed.

Let's see... wasn't Copeland also demoed several years ago? Where is it now?

So Marty, you dare to compare a REAL, functional Windows Mobile Treo (a device that only the truly clueless would deny will be easy for HTC to produce) to PalmLinux (a fantasy OS that is early in its development and had a bogus "demo" at DevCon hoped to fool the gullible into thinking it's actually a functional OS)? That's not even worthy of being labelled a specious statement. Mendacity, thy name is Marty.

TVoR



------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
PenguinPowered @ 8/16/2005 11:24:11 PM # Q
Poor TVoR, confused again. Sorry TVor, I've never met Mace, and have no idea who he is.

You're misreading McVeigh again, but if you want to keep believing that there's no work being done on Cobalt, feel free.

Nice job of generating window, though. I never claimed anything different than is on your list, other than to correct your misunderstanding of McVeigh's quote. I just asked you to apply the same rule to the rumored phone -- which hasn't even been demo-ed and which neither HTC nor Palm claims any schedule for -- that you apply to PalmOS.

If that's FUD, you've got a very funny definition of FUD.


RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
PenguinPowered @ 8/16/2005 11:31:11 PM # Q
> you dare to compare a REAL, functional Windows Mobile Treo to > PalmLinux

You're confused again. Here's the evidence for this "real" functional Windows Mobile Treo: A video taken with a Nokia camera phone of a mock up playing what could well be an mpeg and not a demo of anything. An anonymous video. Of a device which neither HTC nor Palm have claimed exists.

Here's the evidence for the reality of PalmLinux: A demo shown to a packed room full of developers. Source code for the OS part that you can download from web sites, compile yourself, and test the robustness of. (ARMLinux is very robust, and getting better every day.) An announced schedule. Two announced licensees.

Of course I wouldn't compare a fantasy video to an OS that I've seen demo-ed.

Was the Palm part of PalmLinux pre-alpha at the demo? Absolutely. PalmSource even went out of their way to say so. Have they been actively working on it ever since? Only if they want to stay in business. Is it more robust now than it was at DevCon? Only if they want to stay in business.



RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
Gekko @ 8/17/2005 12:22:54 AM # Q

PenguinBoy - Stop the jealousy and stop living in denial. It's game over. You lose and MSFT wins - once again. Stop insulting our intelligence with your silly PSRC "hail mary" apologist fantasies.



RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
AdamaDBrown @ 8/17/2005 3:29:02 AM # Q
You have to take into account the fact that the photos and video of the Treo are from a very reputable person, who has a long history of providing sneak previews at upcoming phones. Also, there are two sources for the Treo information and photos, the other being the original report by DNT of TreoCentral. And in this "it's only a video" theory I keep hearing batted about, I fail to see an explanation for how the video is being prompted by taps on the screen (see the later videos, there are several), and how a Treo 650 suddenly grew a 240 x 240 screen and a new case. (The dot pitch is visible in some of the crisp, high-res photos.) And how many times have you seen a company acknowledge a leak of a device before it's released? I've heard a dozen theories ever since the first reports came in about why the Windows Treo wasn't real. The screen wasn't on. It's just a 650 prototype. It's a fake. It's just screenshots. It's a video. It's a case swap. It's just a prototype that will never be released. How much evidence do you really need?

In contrast, did any of those developers actually get to use the PalmLinux demo? Run their own apps on it? Dig into it a bit? If they didn't, how do you know it wasn't faked up using the Cobalt simulator? It does happen, you know, when companies want to show something off that isn't ready yet.

If I may ask, who are these "two announced licensees" of PalmLinux?

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
Rome @ 8/17/2005 4:15:27 AM # Q
Once upon a time, the #2 mobile phone company in the world announced a MW based smartphone a year before it was available. All the M$ MVPs rejoiced and yelled, "here comes the Treo killer. Treo is dead, and so is Palm." The phone had a full keyboard, bluebooth, and most importantly - Wifi!!!

The phone was definitely real, not just some fuzzy video footages taken with a camera phone. Hell, you can even buy an engineering sample off ebay for US$1000. So, a year went by while all the M$ MVPs eagerly await their "Treo Killer." But there was no phone after 12 months, or after 13 months, or after 14 months. Finally, the phone was quietly released to "select" countries in Asia. All the M$ MVPs came out of their hiding and proclaimed the imminent release of their "Treo Killer" MW phone in the U.S. But that day never came. The phone was officially terminated by the #2 mobile phone company last month.

The smartphone's name was Motorola MPX.


Kids, please ask yourself what lessons you can from this "story".



RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
sr4 @ 8/17/2005 5:37:47 AM # Q
Dont try and release a PPC Phone with a 195Mhz processor and 11Mb ram free?

I sure hope Motorola has learned this lesson.

Surur

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
hkklife @ 8/17/2005 9:38:11 AM # Q
The Q will undoubtably fare bettwe than the ill-fated MPX. If for no reason other than the continued "buzz" around the RAZR. That thing's, what, a year old now and people are still getting all hot & bothered over it. It's arrival on Verizon this fall will only keep the momentum going...momentum that the Q will defintely be able to utilize.

Heck, if the CDMA Razr2 has 40mb of onboard memory then I am sure Moto has learned from the MPX debacle that Surur pointed out (the piddly amount of RAM and a CPU bested by the Zire 31) etc.

Something tells me that Moto (at least in the handset market) is in the process of turning the corner and going to have a very good '06.

Finally, I trust Roc at Howardforums more than just about any other "source" in the mobile tech world--and that includes any number of the scoop-getters in the POS world. If he says the phone's legit than I am nearly certain it is. Doesn't anyone remember the "universal" keyboard P1 released last year that had both PPC and Palm drivers available? They were obviously sticking a toe into the water back then and getting experience writing a basic driver or two.

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
Sam H @ 8/17/2005 2:28:46 PM # Q
Here's the evidence for the reality of PalmLinux: ... Two announced licensees.

Yeah, who are these "two announced licensees" for PalmLinux?


RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
PenguinPowered @ 8/17/2005 4:13:06 PM # Q
> In contrast, did any of those developers actually get to use
> the PalmLinux demo?

Yes

> Run their own apps on it? Dig into it a bit?

No.

> If they didn't, how do you know it wasn't faked up using the
> Cobalt simulator?

The demo was on an actual arm device: TI Perseus 2 development board. Part of the demo was demonstrating the debugger, including a cross compile and a reboot. Tough to simulate a debugger debugging an arm device or a Linux boot using a Cobalt simulator.

> It does happen, you know, when companies want to show
> something off that isn't ready yet.

PalmSource made no claim that what they were showing was ready. They said it was an early pre-alpha demo. And then they showed it on real hardware to a packed room full of people, some of whom got a bit of hands-on with it afterwards.

It would not surprise me if Palm eventually used HTC to do a winmobile on an uprev of the 650.

But it amuses me no end the extent to which people who are willing to believe in that phone based on the slim evidence of a couple of videos are unwilling to believe in an announced scheduled product with a known public demo.

As for the two licensees, they were announced in the press. Google is your friend.

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
svrontis @ 8/17/2005 6:18:07 PM # Q
Penguinpowered,

Give up. This place is now only for M$ sponsored Whiners - people who are paid to troll this board to repeat all the standard lines coming out of Redmond. Is it a co-incidence that post after post we see here merely parrot what appears over at pocketpcthoughts.com? I don't think so.

I remember, long ago, Gekko scored some points by calling Kirvan 'a hack and a shill'. Well, after the above display, the expression 'look who's talking' comes to mind.

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
Gekko @ 8/17/2005 7:13:36 PM # Q

svrontis - yes - it's all part of one big MSFT conspiracy against PALM/PSRC. Because we all know that PALM/PSRC has made so many brilliant moves lately with the buggy FrankenGarnet T5, LifeDrive, NVFS Treo, and Cobalt. MSFT is really desperate when they look at marketshare trend numbers that they must now resort to pay for anti-Palm posts. I actually get a penny to post - I hear Surur gets two!

If you want happy blind apologist kool-aid feel-good cheerleading with the immediate censoring of any counterpoint, please go to 1src.com or Brighthand.com. And be sure to tell Palm's bloated Chief Senior Apologist that I sent you.



RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/17/2005 10:51:57 PM # Q
Sorry TVor, I've never met Mace, and have no idea who he is.

You're misreading McVeigh again, but if you want to keep believing that there's no work being done on Cobalt, feel free.

Nice job of generating window, though. I never claimed anything different than is on your list, other than to correct your misunderstanding of McVeigh's quote. I just asked you to apply the same rule to the rumored phone -- which hasn't even been demo-ed and which neither HTC nor Palm claims any schedule for -- that you apply to PalmOS.

If that's FUD, you've got a very funny definition of FUD.

So you work for PalmSource and "never met Mace, and have no idea who he is"? Try looking in your bedroom. ["What? In our house?"]

Cobalt has been in development for 4 years now with NOTHING to show for itself. Assigning Skippy, the summer intern to play aroung with a few test beds running Cobalt doesn't quite count as "work being done on Cobalt". Sorry.

Even the biggest Palm Apologist can see that PalmSource has no cards. Suddenly you and the rest of the Sad Sacks at PalmSource are going to change your ways and manage to integrate scavenged pieces of Cobalt with a Linux kernel WITHIN A YEAR? Why not just try to scale PalmLinux up into a desktop OS and recreate the successes of BeOS while you're at it?

I define FUD as any misinformation knowingly posted to create uncertainty within a target group. Falsely boosting a dying platform (PalmOS) and pretending all is well while at the same time bashing Palm's competitor simply because it's successful counts as FUD in my books. [I'll let Surur have the honor of posting a link to the Wikipedia definition of "FUD", utterly shaming you again. ;-O]

You're a FRAUD, Marty. Shame on you.



------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
AdamaDBrown @ 8/17/2005 11:58:55 PM # Q
PalmSource made no claim that what they were showing was ready.

I meant having a demo ready, and you know it.

on the slim evidence of a couple of videos

On the slim evidence of two witnesses who have no reason to lie, a flurry of photos, several videos, and expert analysis of those photos. Do you deny that the screen's dot pitch is visible in the photo? Do you want to explain how and why two unconnected people wanted to perpetrate the same hoax? Do you care to enlighten us as to why a person with an excellent reputation for inside information would suddenly start deceiving his audience?

If this were a new Palm OS Treo, you'd be calling anyone who still doubted its existence deluded. I'm all for vigorous debate, but trying to say that the thing doesn't exist is stretching the bounds of credulity.

are unwilling to believe in an announced scheduled product with a known public demo.

It's not that we don't believe PalmSource is trying to build PalmLinux. It's just that some of us have been through all this before with Cobalt. It was exactly the same routine: big advancements that were going to revitalize the platform, progress being made, demos being shown... release date pushed back. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat. I've been looking forward to Cobalt as long as anyone, back to wondering if they were going to produce hardware soon enough for me to replace my m505. After the fiasco that Cobalt has become, I choose to remain dubious about any supposed progress that PSRC is making, until they can put a product in my hand.

I'd love to be surprised, I really would. I miss strong and vibrant competition in the handheld market. While Palm Inc has been making some progress on that score, the platform itself is desperately in need of a renovation, something to clean out the bugs, level the playing field, and give it some energy again. I don't think PalmSource can do it, so I'm looking at Palm Inc, and wondering how many codemonkeys they have assigned to fixing Cobalt. I'm hoping for something good, though I know better than to expect it.

Game, Set, Match. 6 love, 6 love, 6 love. So sorry, Marty...
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/18/2005 2:05:20 AM # Q
> Please explain how you "have no financial interest in... PalmSource"
> if they are paying you money to work for them.

Poor TVoR. Using terms he doesn't understand. "financial interest" doesn't mean what you seem to think it means. I have no financial interest in PalmSource. I have no financial relationship of any sort with Palm, despite your earlier assertion.

So are we to take it that you're denying that you work for PalmSource? And that you have nothing to do with the coding of PalmLinux? Or that you weren't part of the sham "early pre-alpha demo"? [Gotta LOVE that term - I'm now calling the revolutionary OS I just sketched out on a c0cktail napkin an "early pre-alpha demo" as well!] Please let us know, Marty. You already have no credibility, so what's another lie?

> Please try to remember that not all portable devices are
> smartphones.

If you record an mp3 of that, I'll stick it on my iRiver.

You have an iRiver too? Wow. I guess they'll sell one to anyone these days. I think several people would have some other suggestions about where exactly you could "stick it".

> Palm still sells something called a PDA and we here at
> Palminfocenter still discuss these devices.

That's nice. But in _this_ thread, you were discussing PalmOS, not Palm. Besides, you need to keep your stories straight. You've already agreed that the PDA was dead. Let's stop looking backwards, shall we?

How lame, Mr. Fouts. You had posted:

"Why would a user opt for PalmOS over WinMobile now? Because they like the Treo650 and don't feel like waiting until the rumored Treo670 is available from their carrier, I suppose. This would explain why Palm had such a good quarter with the 650 last quarter."

I responded: "That is the ONLY reason I can see for buying a PalmOS phone now. Please try to remember that (despite your bias) not all portable devices are smartphones. Palm still sells something called a PDA and we here at Palminfocenter still discuss these devices. The PalmOS Treo sales are likely going to get a rude awakening in a few months when the Windows Mobile Treos are announced."

And PDAs are NOT dead. PIM-only PDAs are a dying breed, but PDAs are now being reinvented as other multifunction devices. Furthermore, just because the sales of a particular product is shrinking does not suddenly make those devices unworthy of discussion. No matter what you may feel about how important smartphones are.

OK, let me slow it down some more for you, Marty: The PalmOS vs. Windows Mobile battle is not just being waged on the smartphone front. These OSes are also found in devices called PDAs. Evidently you've never heard of them, but some of us here at Palminfocenter have been known to use and discuss these devices on occasion. And if my aging memory serves me correctly, I don't recall setting up limitations on what could or could not be discussed here when I started this thread.

> The PalmOS Treo sales are likely going to get a rude awakening in a
> few months when the Windows Mobile Treos are announced.

"few"? I guess that depends on your definition of 'few'. Even the rumors have the winmobile treo more than a few months away. As for which treo sales do well, we'll have to see when and if this winmobile device ever makes it to market.

People should be able to purchase a WinMob Treo within 6 months. That's my definition of "few". Happy?

> last time I checked, PalmLinux did not exist on any shipping
> devices. In fact, PalmLinux is BARELY into development and is
> currently trying to overcome a few potentially showstopping
> problems.

Poor TvoR, confused again. You really need to get better sources at PalmSource. PalmLinux was demo-ed at the Devcon, and has, one would presume, been in development since. The two bits that it is composed of, Cobalt, and Linux, have both been in development for years. The only thing that's "barely" in development would be integrating the two, and in that case, "barely" is now about six months, if my aging memory serves me correctly.

Really? I was at DevCon and if my aging memory serves me correctly the developers I spoke to were not impressed with your "early pre-alpha demo". Smells like Copeland. Smells like Cobalt. OK, let me slow it down some more for you, Marty: smells like the mighty Wizard from The Wizard of Oz.

And unfortunately, it's the integration of the two that is the issue. OK, let me slow it down some more for you, Marty: Paint has been around for a few years. Canvas has also been around for a few years. But combining the two does not necessarily create a work of art. In fact, based on PalmSource's recent history, perhaps the best we should be expecting from them is a Velvet Elvis.

> I don't have much faith in PalmSource providing good security given
> their/Palm's extremely poor track record.

did you notice that M$ just discovered three brand new critical
security problems in xp? You really only have to do barely better than that to be successful.

So Microsoft is actively searching for and correcting flaws in its OS? What a concept. Maybe PalmSource should try doing that sometime. Who knows, maybe we would actually see a stable, fast, SHIPPING version of Cobalt if they did. Or a fixed Data Mangler. Or a fixed NVFS implementation. Or real security as a part of PalmOS. Or...

> Again, we're not just talking about PHONES here.

Phones are where the interesting bugs are in nonvolatile
solutions. It's harder to do well on phones than on classic PDAs.

So? Again, we're not just talking about PHONES here. Despite your (painfully obvious) bias.

> Again, we're not just talking phones. And again, PalmLinux does not
> yet exist. And again you seem to be agreeing with my list.

It's funny that you keep claiming that PalmLinux doesn't exist, even though it was demo-ed at Devcon, but keep going on about a supposed m$ treo that neither HTC nor Palm will admit to, as if it was shipping soon. Almost as funny as your anonmity coupled with your obsession with other people's ids.

But in this case, (USB otg) everything I said about phones applies equally to PDAs.

PalmLinux exists as much as the 2009 Porsche 911 exists. On paper + a few working concepts. But until it's actually fully BUILT, tested, rebuilt, retested and then put into production, PalmLinux doesn't exist. It's like those wonderful SDIO cards we saw a few years ago when SD was introduced. It's like those vaporware Springboard models that we were shown but never materialized. It's like Cobalt was a couple years ago. It's like Nagel's third DOA OS, Copeland was 10 years ago. It's like... you know. PalmLinux is VAPORWARE. As someone intimately familiar with it, you know that PalmLinux just learned to stand up and is in the process of trying to take its first step. To imply that it will be ready to compete with Windows Mobile in the Olympic Marathon next year is beyond ridiculous.

Obsession wit IDs? Please. I have merely exposed you as someone who is untrustworthy because you work designing a product that is being discussed - and openly criticised - here at PIC. The fact that you don't have the cojones (or decency) to clarify a conflict of interest speaks for itself. Had you simply identified yourself as "PalmSource employee" in your signature, this wouldn't have been an issue. As for me remaining anonymous, I have NO conflict of interest here. And as I've said before (and you recently parrotted) who I am is irrelevant - my posts stand on their own merit. I believe I've proven over the years to be a brutally honest, accurate critic of Palm/PalmSource/Microsoft/Windows Mobile. Disagree? Put it in writing. I'm open to debate, but given how weak your position is, I guarantee you will lose.

> We'll believe it (filesystem support) when we see it.

Check kernel.org. All of the filesystems I mentioned are there,
except YAFFS2, for which, see aleph1. You can see it now.

Again, this means NOTHING until we can see everything INTEGRATED, tested and finalized in a device-ready version of PalmLinux. Your "early pre-alpha demo" is a waste of our time. Let us know when you have somethng that can actually be evaluated in terms of stability and robustness. OK, let me slow it down some more for you, Marty: If you're making someone a cake, they don't really care that you have chosen the finest flour or the purest distilled water. All they want to know is if the cake will taste good. To know that, you actually have to mix ALL the ingredients and then actually bake the cake and then actually taste the cake. The proof is in the pudding [cake].

> My ego is almost as big as you say it is, but at least I can back it
> up. You, on the other hand, have no excuse. From what I hear,
> Bluetooth is a big deal in Europe. Does Palm still want to sell
> devices in Europe or have they given up there as well?

Have no idea where all Palm wants to sell devices. But given how accurate what you hear has turned out to be on other stuff, I'd not give much credence to what you "hear" about bluetooth in europe.

Don't take my word for it. Just ask those who live in Europe and report on the European market. Bluetooth took off there two years before it did in North America. Sorry, Marty.

> Please try to get over your (unbalanced) hatred of all things
> Microsoft.

I don't hate anything m$, other that the various business practices that they indulge in that have been demonstrated illegal in court.

You sure come across as a deranged Microsoft basher. Anyone that calls the company M$ pretty much proves they are unable to look at the company objectively. Regarding Microsoft's losses in a few court battles: it's not as if the courts have ever made a mistake, right? If you look at how many bogus cases Microsoft has had to fight over absurd patents, in addition to greedy municipalities looking to prey on "Big Bad Microsoft", it's amazing the company still manages to go on. While I don't approve of some of the ways Gates has exerted his influence to achieve market domination, there's no denying that Microsoft is getting royally screwed simply because they're... Microsoft. And I don't see people rushing out in droves to switch to any alternate desktop OSes. MacOS is a joke that has been allowed by Microsoft to exist simply to avoid even worse "anticompetitive"/"monopoly" headaches. Apple isn't even a real computer company anymore. They're a consumer electronic company (with good marketing and industrial degign) that also happens to market computers to a rabid, cult-like following. OS/2 was smothered by IBM's arrogance and incompetence. Linux is not user friendly for anyone who's not a 133t hAkk0r and it doesn't have the massive app library Windows boasts. BeOS was killed (deservedly) by JL Gassée's uadulterated greed.

> Exchange has a HUGE user base and most of those companies must be
> pretty happy with it or else they wouldn't still be using it.

"happy with" and "find easy" are wildly different things. No
companies are finding exchange all that easy to use or deploy, and few are happy with the amount of resources it takes to manage it.

So why don't all these companies use other solutions if Exchange is so evil? Could it be that Exchange is actually a good system compared to the competition? Could this be true? Shocking!

> These days both the standard and 3rd party "core" apps available for
> Windows Mobile appear to be "better" than their Palm equivalents. Try
> doing a relatively impartial comparison and maybe you'll see for
> yourself.

Well, "better than" is hardly "bug free", but rather than take your word for it, I think I'll wait and see what the market decides. It's hard for me to imagine that m$ will do any better on winmobile than they do on win/xp, and win/xp is classic buggy software.

XP has been pretty stable in my experience. In fact I don't hear too many complaints about XP that can't be traced back to user error or buggy third party software. Of course that's not what a Linux programmer like you wants to hear, right Marty?

> And Microsoft is evil incarnate, right?

Nope. But it's a drag on innovation and it has a long well documented track record of illegal monopolistic practices.

Illegal? Depends on who you talk to. And other companies are free to "innovate" all they want. Only problem is that innovating often requires skill, time and money, with no guarantee of returns. That's why market leaders - like Palm once was - are often slow to innovate as long as they are doing well. And history is full of innovative companies that never made a penny from those innovations. (At least until they sued Microsoft like our good ole buddies at Be. ;-O)

OK, try to stay focused here. You asserted that you had a list of 10 things that PalmOS "MUST fix to survive" (your emphasis). I merely pointed out that a bunch of those things are already fixed, that no one has fixes for some of them, and that others aren't as important as you make out.

No, I think you need to try and stay focused here. As I pointed out, NONE of those things are currently fixed in any version of PalmOS shipping on devices anyone can buy today. SOME of those things MIGHT be fixed in future versions of PalmOS, but no one will know for sure unless/until devices with Cobalt and/or PalmLinux finally ship. If PalmSource doesn't make the fixes I listed, they are DEAD. Period.

I think you're wrong about "push" email, but that if you're right, the solution will come out of the telecoms and not out of traditional email.

Well I think you're wrong, as the success of Blackberry has shown. Companies are loathe to pay extra for services, and the WinMob/Exchange push email solution will be VERY compelling to companies already running Exchange. And I think Microsoft might know a thing or two about leveraging its technologies...

I don't know if you're wrong or not about backup, but it's rare that OS vendors provide it in other spaces, so I'm not surprised that the current situation has people using third party backup.

Sell a mobile device that's marketed to store all of your vital information, yet provide NO way to back up that information on the device. Real smart. Especially when Palm/PalmSource supposedly have all these software engineers sitting around (apparently twiddling their thumbs). If Palm/PalmSource are too incompetent to roll their own simple backup app they should simply license BackupMan from TRG/HandEra's Mike Waldron.

The rest of what you brought up is either already fixed in whatever they'll end up calling Cobalt + Linux, or is no worse in that than it is in any of the competitors.

It's statements like this that reveal you to be nothing more than a Michael Mace-style SPIN doctor/FUDmeister of the worst order. Saying something is fixed in PalmLinux is meaningless, since this OS does not exist and may very well never make it to market. Of what use it it saying a problem MIGHT be fixed in an OS that MIGHT be on shipping devices in say, 2007? And sorry, but most of the PalmOS deficiencies listed are actually either corrected or at least much less intrusive in Windows Mobile.

TVoR


------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
PenguinPowered @ 8/18/2005 3:59:47 AM # Q
> So you "never met Mace, and have no idea who he is"?

Yup. I suppose I could google the name, but I've no idea who he is.

> Assigning Skippy, the summer intern to play aroung with
> a few test beds running Cobalt doesn't quite
> count as "work being done on Cobalt".

That's right, Skippy. From this, we can conclude that the people at PalmSource working on Cobalt are not summer interns.

> Suddenly you and the rest of the Sad Sacks at PalmSource are
> going to change your ways and manage to integrate scavenged
> pieces of Cobalt with a Linux kernel WITHIN A YEAR?

Oh dear, Skippy's confused again. Poor Skippy. I've been developing OSes for 30 years, Skippy; but I'm not integrating pieces of Cobalt with anything. On the other hand, I've got a nice ARM Linux distro running. It's very robust, and you can download the source yourself.

> I define FUD as any misinformation knowingly posted to create
> uncertainty within a target group.

Ah. Another private definition. You forgot the F and the D there, Skippy. No cookie for you.

> Falsely boosting a dying platform (PalmOS) and pretending all
> is well while at the same time bashing Palm's competitor
> simply because it's successful counts as FUD in my books.

Ah, then you're accusing the wrong penguin, there Skippy. I haven't bashed Symbiant at all, and I 'bash' m$ about the things it does wrong. Been doing that since before there was a PalmOS.

You also might want to read a little more carefully, there Skippy. I haven't "boosted" PalmOS at all. I've merely pointed out mistakes in various people's claims. And only you would characterize comments like the ones I've made about PalmLinux being PalmSource's last change as 'pretending all is well.'

Yup, you're definitely generating window. Not FUD. You aspire to FUD but it's outside your range.

Again, thanks for the humor. You do some of the best unintentional irony on the net.


RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
PenguinPowered @ 8/18/2005 4:15:11 AM # Q
> On the slim evidence of two witnesses who have no reason to
> lie, a flurry of photos, several videos, and expert analysis
> of those photos.

Um, the experts are in disagreement on their analysis.

> Do you deny that the screen's dot pitch is visible in the
> photo? Do you want to explain how and why two unconnected
> people wanted to perpetrate the same hoax? Do you care to
> enlighten us as to why a person with an excellent reputation
> for inside information would suddenly start deceiving his
> audience?

You should hang out with the UFO-ology debunkers. You'd learn a lot about how to answer questions like that. But no, I don't want to explain anything. I'll just keep being amused.

> If this were a new Palm OS Treo, you'd be calling anyone who
> still doubted its existence deluded.

Um, no. But I'd still say that people who believe in this and doubt the existance of PalmLinux -- to the point of grasping at straws about whether or not a demo was faked -- aren't using the same rules to evaluate both.

> I'm all for vigorous debate, but trying to say that the thing
> doesn't exist is stretching the bounds of credulity.

See, that's where you and I differ. I'll believe in PalmLinux when I've got it in hand. I'll believe in this treo when it's actually on the market. Even if HTC and Palm _are_ working on a prototype, there are plenty of ways it can not get to, or be long delayed in arriving in the market.

> It's not that we don't believe PalmSource is trying to build
> PalmLinux. It's just that some of us have been through all
> this before with Cobalt. It was exactly the same routine: big
> advancements that were going to revitalize the platform,
> progress being made, demos being shown... release date pushed
> back. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat.

Now that's a more reasonable position. Not, as far as I can tell, that anyone has pushed back any release dates for PalmLinux, but yeah, if PalmSource has a track record of delays, then you should be suspicious of their schedules.

> I've been looking forward to Cobalt as long as anyone, back
> to wondering if they were going to produce hardware soon
> enough for me to replace my m505. After the fiasco that
> Cobalt has become, I choose to remain dubious about any
> supposed progress that PSRC is making, until they can put a
> product in my hand.

As you should. Now be just as dubious about a phone that hasn't even been announced. Be especially dubious about optimistic claims of release dates.

> I'd love to be surprised, I really would. I miss strong and
> vibrant competition in the handheld market. While Palm Inc
> has been making some progress on that score, the platform
> itself is desperately in need of a renovation, something to
> clean out the bugs, level the playing field, and give it some
> energy again.

Fair enough.

> I don't think PalmSource can do it, so I'm looking at Palm
> Inc, and wondering how many codemonkeys they have assigned to
> fixing Cobalt.

If my aging memory serves me correctly, I believe that the answer given by Palm is "none".

> I'm hoping for something good, though I know better than to
> expect it.

Given your experience, a very reasonable position.

On the other hand, I've seen any number of 'leaked' products never make it to market. Sometimes the leaks are hoaxes. Sometimes they're premature info on a prototype that ends up being killed for one reason or another. Sometime they're trial balloons and the product gets killed as a result of the response to the leak. Sometimes they pan out.

So I'll believe in PalmLinux when I can use it, and I'll believe in a winmob Treo when I can get it from my carrier.


RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
twrock @ 8/18/2005 9:37:30 AM # Q
Game, Set, Match. 6 love, 6 love, 6 love. So sorry, Marty...

"...because I said so!"

Why don't you leave the judging to the readership, not to the "participants". I might be able to let you know what I think after I've managed to work my way through this latest tirade and PenguinPowered's response. But at this point I'm not sure it's worth the effort.

And why do you keep after the "Palm connection"? It doesn't matter. Either what he's saying is "on" or it's not. It's that simple. It doesn't matter who he is any more than it matters who you are. It's just words on a "page". But you keep after it like it's some sort of personal vendetta. Suggesting where someone should "stick it" who is "talking" quite calmly and rationally is a bit over the top. That kind of reaction is usually used by people who are afaid they are losing an arguement, not winning it.

I'm still waiting for the mythical "color HandEra."

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/18/2005 11:55:58 AM # Q
"...because I said so!"

Why don't you leave the judging to the readership, not to the "participants". I might be able to let you know what I think after I've managed to work my way through this latest tirade and PenguinPowered's response. But at this point I'm not sure it's worth the effort.

And why do you keep after the "Palm connection"? It doesn't matter. Either what he's saying is "on" or it's not. It's that simple. It doesn't matter who he is any more than it matters who you are. It's just words on a "page". But you keep after it like it's some sort of personal vendetta. Suggesting where someone should "stick it" who is "talking" quite calmly and rationally is a bit over the top. That kind of reaction is usually used by people who are afaid they are losing an arguement, not winning it.

Yes, others here can judge for themselves. Guess who they agree with. No, this isn't a a "personal vendetta" (how dramaitc!), this is what grownups call a "debate". Now hush, child.

[No doubt you'll also see Mr. Fouts' weak attempt at humor ("Skippy") to be proof that he lost the debate.]


------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
sr4 @ 8/18/2005 4:45:09 PM # Q

There has been reference before to the value of the built-in POS apps. This app attempts specifically to bring the ease of use of POS Calender to PPC.

IntumiCal is a replacement for the built-in Pocket PC calendar.

We found Pocket Outlook's user interface too clumsy, and other alternatives try to be everything to everybody. There was just nothing as simple and elegant as the Palm calendar available for the Pocket PC, so we sat down to create a no-nonsense, easy to use, and nice looking calendar.

IntumiCal's powerful, yet easily accessible user interface has been deliberately and carefully designed to make day-to-day calendaring tasks a breeze. And, of course, IntumiCal is fully compatible with ActiveSync and Outlook.

If you're looking for a slim calendar that's easy to use, IntumiCal may be a fit.

http://www.intumi.com/calui.html
http://www.intumi.com/

Palm can not continue to cruise on past achievements, as they eventually become commoditized, reducing their value. They need to innovate anew to survive.

Surur

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
PenguinPowered @ 8/18/2005 4:47:59 PM # Q
> So are we to take it that you're denying that you work for
> PalmSource?

Neither denying nor confirming. Eventually I'll dig up the jacket blurb from Lord of Light that's relevent here, but not today.

> Or that you weren't part of the "early pre-alpha demo"?

Had no part in that at all.

> And PDAs are NOT dead.

Well, make up your mind. You've taken both sides of that argument.

> The PalmOS vs. Windows Mobile battle is not just being waged
> on the smartphone front.

Right. There's more phones than smart phones.

> People should be able to purchase a WinMob Treo within 6
> months. That's my definition of "few". Happy?

Is that one of those predictions you're so proud of? If it is I'll write it down and we can discuss it again in mid February.

> And unfortunately, it's the integration of the two that is
> the issue.

Alas, no, that is the issue.

> Obsession wit IDs?

Yup. Childishly obsessed.

> As for me remaining anonymous, I have NO conflict of interest
> here.

So you claim. Of course, since you're anonymous, there's way to check. Just as there's no way to check that you have any access to the 'sources' you claim to have at PalmSource.

See, that's the difference. I make no claims about special knowledge. I make my case. Either it stands or it doesn't. Readers decide.

> I believe I've proven over the years to be a brutally honest,

Brutal yes. Honest, debatable.

> accurate

not in the short time I've been here. I wouldn't be interacting if I hadn't had to correct inaccurate statements you've made.

>> Check kernel.org. All of the filesystems I mentioned are
>> there, except YAFFS2, for which, see aleph1. You can see
>> it now.

> Again, this means NOTHING until we can see everything
> INTEGRATED, tested and finalized in a device-ready version of
> PalmLinux.

Actually, the NAND/YAFFS system is already shipping on Linux embedded arm devices.

> Don't take my word for it. Just ask those who live in Europe
> and report on the European market.

> Regarding Microsoft's losses in a few court battles: it's not
> as if the courts have ever made a mistake, right?

Now that's a stretch. In at least two federal cases, M$ has admitted to the wrong doing, so that they could settle the penalty.

> So why don't all these companies use other solutions if
> Exchange is so evil? Could it be that Exchange is actually a
> good system compared to the competition? Could this be true?

Why did VHS beat out the technically superior BetaMax? The reasons are rarely about the quality, especially when you're dealing with a monopoly.

> XP has been pretty stable in my experience. In fact I don't
> hear too many complaints about XP that can't be traced back
> to user error or buggy third party software.

You should read the MSDN developers site then. XP has plenty of M$ created bugs, as admitted by M$ in their own bug database.

> Illegal? Depends on who you talk to.

How about M$? They've _admitted_ that they've used illegal monopolistic practices and agreed to stop them.

> If PalmSource doesn't make the fixes I listed, they are DEAD.

So young, so certain, so wrong. PalmSource is on its last try, but you've not hit the list of things they need to do.

> Sell a mobile device that's marketed to store all of your
> vital information, yet provide NO way to back up that
> information on the device.

See, there you go being wrong again. They did provide a way to backup the information.

> Saying something is fixed in PalmLinux is meaningless, since
> this OS does not exist and may very well never make it to
> market.

OK, I'll slow it down farther for you. PalmSource is no longer providing an entirely PalmSource implemented OS. A large chunk of the low level is now from Linux. The problems that are fixed are fixed there, and the solutions are deployed and in use. They couldn't break that if they wanted to.



RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
PenguinPowered @ 8/18/2005 5:14:30 PM # Q
> this is what grownups call a "debate". Now hush, child.

Well, if it were what the grownups call a debate, one of the participants wouldn't be running around claiming to have won it. It's up to the judges, in this case the readership, to decide for themselves who won.

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
twrock @ 8/18/2005 7:34:53 PM # Q
...this is what grownups call a "debate".

LOL. You really are too much. I've heard other supposed grownups try the same trick. But you shouldn't be so foolish to think it will work, not on a child much less real grownups.

Back when I was a child, we were required to learn how to debate and to have debates as part of our early education. How you typically "perform" here is anything but debate. But continue on with your "games". I do hope you are enjoying yourself. Children's games are at times entertaining, possibly even for the adults watching.

I'm still waiting for the mythical "color HandEra."

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
svrontis @ 8/18/2005 9:11:07 PM # Q
> Palm can not continue to cruise on past achievements, as they eventually become commoditized, reducing their value. They need to innovate anew to survive.

Unfortunately, most of the innovation we see from the WinCE camp is in the realm of marketing. Your post refers to a new PIM replacement, which provides a good example of the phenomenon. For years, the PIM functions on WinCE/PPC/WinMob/whatever devices have been pathetic. Did M$ ever try to improve them? No, of course not. They merely launched a slur campaign against Palm on the basis that a palmpilot is 'just an organiser' - this coming from a company which produced a poor-excuse-for-an-organiser - and completely ignored the fact that most users do in fact want to use PIM functions on a handheld computer. In other words, M$ took the view that they should not spend money trying to provide something which users wanted; rather it was better to tell users that it was uncool to want it. That's certainly an innovative approach.

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/18/2005 10:43:01 PM # Q
> So are we to take it that you're denying that you work for
> PalmSource?

Neither denying nor confirming. Eventually I'll dig up the jacket blurb from Lord of Light that's relevent here, but not today.

Give it up, Marty. Everyone knows who you are, so feel free to keep up your little charade if it makes you feel better.

> Or that you weren't part of the "early pre-alpha demo"?

Had no part in that at all.

Congratulations. So you've washed your hands of that little smoke and mirrors trick? Was the Wizard from "The Wizard of Oz" hired to run the "demo" this time?

> And PDAs are NOT dead.

Well, make up your mind. You've taken both sides of that argument.

As usual, reading comprehension is not your forté. As said before, traditional PIM-only PDAs are a stagnant dying niche. But PDAs are reinventing themselves and a company with vision can easily revitalize the market. An iPod/Video/PDA device with Wi-Fi/Bluetooth/cell radio is the Holy Grail for the next year.

> The PalmOS vs. Windows Mobile battle is not just being waged
> on the smartphone front.

Right. There's more phones than smart phones.

And there are more mobile devices than PHONES. You're perseverating again, Marty. Try to keep up.

> People should be able to purchase a WinMob Treo within 6
> months. That's my definition of "few". Happy?

Is that one of those predictions you're so proud of? If it is I'll write it down and we can discuss it again in mid February.

Yes, I'm on record for giving a date. As usual, I'll be right. And as usual, no one will hear so much as a peep from you in six months. No doubt by then you'll be busy trying to pump Linux with another naive company desperate to hitch their sorry a$$ to the Magical Linux Bandwagon.

> And unfortunately, it's the integration of the two that is
> the issue.

Alas, no, that is the issue.

???

> Obsession with IDs?

Yup. Childishly obsessed.

No, Marty. Just thought it was time for someone to expose you as the Linux Lovin' Charlatan (LLC) you really are. You posts here have shown claerly how precarious a position PalmSource is in. The fact that someone like you within the company is unable to provide a convincing argument that PalmSource has even a slight chance of surviving is quite pathetic.

> As for me remaining anonymous, I have NO conflict of interest
> here.

So you claim. Of course, since you're anonymous, there's way to check. Just as there's no way to check that you have any access to the 'sources' you claim to have at PalmSource.

See, that's the difference. I make no claims about special knowledge. I make my case. Either it stands or it doesn't. Readers decide.

I guess people will just have to decide who to trust. My posts stand on their own, as usual. But unlike you, I have facts and reality on my side and time will prove this soon enough. But keep trying to discredit the messenger. It makes your position seem so much more believable...

> I believe I've proven over the years to be a brutally honest,

Brutal yes. Honest, debatable.

Nice try, Marty. Keep pumping up the false hope that PalmSource actually has a snowball's chance in he11 of surviving.

> accurate

not in the short time I've been here. I wouldn't be interacting if I hadn't had to correct inaccurate statements you've made.

Keep up with the lies, Marty. We've lost count of how many blatant lies and half-truths you've told here. What you fail to understand is that people aren't blind to the truth. You and the former Iraqi Minister of (Mis)Information have a LOT in common: "My feelings - as usual - we will slaughter them all."

>> Check kernel.org. All of the filesystems I mentioned are
>> there, except YAFFS2, for which, see aleph1. You can see
>> it now.

> Again, this means NOTHING until we can see everything
> INTEGRATED, tested and finalized in a device-ready version of
> PalmLinux.

Actually, the NAND/YAFFS system is already shipping on Linux embedded arm devices.

Call us when everything is finalized and working on PalmLinux. You just don't get it, do you?

> Don't take my word for it. Just ask those who live in Europe
> and report on the European market.

> Regarding Microsoft's losses in a few court battles: it's not
> as if the courts have ever made a mistake, right?

Now that's a stretch. In at least two federal cases, M$ has admitted to the wrong doing, so that they could settle the penalty.

Agreeing to everything they did was probably a good idea for Microsoft. The decks were stacked against them and the threat of governmental powers stepping in and breaking up the company loomed large. Microsoft tends to choose its battles wisely.

> So why don't all these companies use other solutions if
> Exchange is so evil? Could it be that Exchange is actually a
> good system compared to the competition? Could this be true?

Why did VHS beat out the technically superior BetaMax? The reasons are rarely about the quality, especially when you're dealing with a monopoly.

Beta lost for many reasons, including Sony's arrogance. But in the end the reasons are academic - one platform wins and another is relegated to the dustbin. Life moves on. Just as I was forced to buy a VHS when my Beta finally died (after 10 years of perfect service - those early Betas were built like a tank!), current PalmOS users are now talking abot moving over to Windows Mobile when theis PalmOS hardware dies. I doubt many will have bothered to stock up with backups units of their favorite hardware the way I've done.

> XP has been pretty stable in my experience. In fact I don't
> hear too many complaints about XP that can't be traced back
> to user error or buggy third party software.

You should read the MSDN developers site then. XP has plenty of M$ created bugs, as admitted by M$ in their own bug database.

So? Care to point out a bug-free OS? At least Microsoft appears to be aware of the flaws and is trying to fix them. Palm/PalmSource prefers to blame developers and "third party software" instead.

> Illegal? Depends on who you talk to.

How about M$? They've _admitted_ that they've used illegal monopolistic practices and agreed to stop them.

Given Microsoft's vulnerable position, I can't blame them for saying everything they needed to say in order to appease the government and just get all the court cases over with. They know they can wait a little and make their money back in the long run.

> If PalmSource doesn't make the fixes I listed, they are DEAD.

So young, so certain, so wrong. PalmSource is on its last try, but you've not hit the list of things they need to do.

Try so not-so-young, so certain, so right.

> Sell a mobile device that's marketed to store all of your
> vital information, yet provide NO way to back up that
> information on the device.

See, there you go being wrong again. They did provide a way to backup the information.

"yet provide NO way to back up that information on the device". As in backing up to external media. Keep trying to twist words to suit your purposes. How sad.


> Saying something is fixed in PalmLinux is meaningless, since
> this OS does not exist and may very well never make it to
> market.

OK, I'll slow it down farther for you. PalmSource is no longer providing an entirely PalmSource implemented OS. A large chunk of the low level is now from Linux. The problems that are fixed are fixed there, and the solutions are deployed and in use. They couldn't break that if they wanted to.

Last time I checked, PalmOS and Linux were not yet completely integrated. I wouldn't be boasting about riding in on Linux's coattails quite yet, Marty.

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
PenguinPowered @ 8/18/2005 5:14:30 PM #

> this is what grownups call a "debate". Now hush, child.

Well, if it were what the grownups call a debate, one of the participants wouldn't be running around claiming to have won it. It's up to the judges, in this case the readership, to decide for themselves who won.

Exit polls say Marty got his a$$ kicked. Again. I'm almost starting to feel sorry for him. Well, not really.



------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/19/2005 10:37:15 PM # Q
> Palm can not continue to cruise on past achievements, as they eventually become commoditized, reducing their value. They need to innovate anew to survive.

Unfortunately, most of the innovation we see from the WinCE camp is in the realm of marketing. Your post refers to a new PIM replacement, which provides a good example of the phenomenon. For years, the PIM functions on WinCE/PPC/WinMob/whatever devices have been pathetic. Did M$ ever try to improve them? No, of course not. They merely launched a slur campaign against Palm on the basis that a palmpilot is 'just an organiser' - this coming from a company which produced a poor-excuse-for-an-organiser - and completely ignored the fact that most users do in fact want to use PIM functions on a handheld computer. In other words, M$ took the view that they should not spend money trying to provide something which users wanted; rather it was better to tell users that it was uncool to want it. That's certainly an innovative approach.

Bull. Microsoft started out with an OS that was far more advanced than PalmOS and finally the hardware has advanced to the point that WinMob might be useful. PalmOS on the other hand was designed to work well on primitive hardware, at the expense of offering advanced features. Every new featere added requires a HUGE amount of effort and/or makes the OS unstable.

I think Palm is going to lose a LOT of customers simply because its hardware, feature set and value can't compete with WinMob manufacturers. Besides preferring hardware like the various CLIEs (or maybe the Tungsten 3) and preferring the PalmOS User Interface, I really find it difficult to imagine users sticking with PalmOS the way things have been going. The sales figures of WinMob Treos vs. PalmOS Treos will probably be the final nail in the coffin (or is it the final stake through the heart?) of PalmSource. No doubt the rats (and Penguins) will have long since deserted PalmSource before it's scuttled by Gassée et. al.

TVoR




------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm Economy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
twrock @ 8/20/2005 10:18:52 PM # Q
Exit polls say Marty got his a$$ kicked.

Yep, right back at it. Couldn't even get through a day without returning to the same old boring routine.

But, please, feel free to continue on ad infinitim about how you have never been wrong, know it all in voluminous detail, and have won every "debate" simply because you have declared yourself the winner.

I should admit that you possibly did "win." But because I couldn't even bring myself to slog all the way through the latest posts, I'll never know if I think you did or not. (On my "scorecard" you were behind up to that point, so unless you really pulled out something amazing, I still don't think so.)

Hey, now I understand you better. You must figure that the person who could stand there the longest and say the most words must have won the "debate." Ok, now I see why you keep thinking you won every debate.

You do appear more childish by the moment. As strange as is sounds, I almost wish Surur would post a little more. As long as this is going to be the cutting edge Palm bashing website on the net, we might as well have someone with something interesting to say "leading the charge."

I'm still waiting for the mythical "color HandEra."

RE: Top 10 list of things PalmOS MUST fix to survive:
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/27/2005 8:09:48 PM # Q
Thanks for sharing.

Take care.

I hope Marty keeps it up, since he's managed to undermine the Palm Apologist position with every post he's made.

TVoR

------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm eCONomy = Communism™
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

Reply to this comment
Start a New Comment Thread Top