|
    Comments on: Rumor: Possible Rendering of the Palm Treo 700?Yet another new Treo rumor this week. The CoolTechTimes has published an image of what appears to be another possible next generation Palm Treo smartphone. Read on for more details.
Detailed Comment View (172 Total Comments)
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. PIC is not responsible for them in any way. login or register for free in order to post comments.  RE: Sticking out aerials are bad design
Actually, its the carrier request for the external antenna (mos def Sprint and VZW, Cingular probably doesnt care, neither does Orange and Rogers). And if you havent noticed, cell phones are not designed for you, they are designed for carriers to be sold to you. We have some pull, but not a lot. Carriers are the customers there. RE: Sticking out aerials are bad designfishtastic @ 8/12/2005 4:21:44 PM #
twizza said 'Actually, its the carrier request for the external antenna' Actually it's an American carrier request. This is because they believe Americans are dumb and if the aerial sticks out then it must get better reception. Now bigger can mean better, but the Treo's reception is not a patch on Nokia phones that are not only smaller but have internal aerials. I rememeber when at least one manufacturer made a phone with a sticking out aerial for the US market, fake because on the Euro models the aerial was internal. It was just a bit of plastic. twizza said Really, I'm shocked, I must remember that for the future. The crap sticking out aerial is one of the reason that the Treo range didn't do well in Europe. It looked like crap, old-fashioned and backwards. If Palm want to sell worldwide then they should have a crap model for the US with a huge aerial and a world model that doesn't look like it stepped out of a time machine from 1996. Fish RE: Sticking out aerials are bad design
And if you havent noticed, cell phones are not designed for you, they are designed for carriers to be sold to you. We have some pull, but not a lot. Carriers are the customers there. From all this stuff I hear about the US carriers, I really think you people are getting seriously jerked around. Fortunately Americans have enough disposable income to be "taken to the cleaners" and still be happy about it. RE: Sticking out aerials are bad design
> This is because they believe Americans are dumb and > if the aerial sticks out then it must get better reception. No, it's so we know what side has to point up. Oliver
RE: Sticking out aerials are bad designfierywater @ 8/13/2005 9:12:15 AM #
Huh. My Audiovox XV-6600 on Verizon doesn't have an aerial. I guess they thought I was a smart American. RE: Sticking out aerials are bad designtriggahead @ 8/14/2005 4:48:15 PM #
What's up with that antenna? WHYYYYYYYYY?!?!? Antennas provide NO what-so-ever advantages - reception is not better and it makes devices uncomfortable in (pant) pockets. Ericsson insisted on antennas and it almost ruined them and forced them into a merger with Sony. And FINALLY they understood that ANTENNAS DON'T SELL and removed them. Since then SonyEricsson devices have been a success in the marketplace (that together with a total rebranding, repositioning and redesign of phones and UI...). PalmSource has screwed up, and now Palm(One) is doing it too? A Treo RUNNING WINDOWS? PalmLinux will be an orgie in delays transforming the (Win)Treo670 to the only viable alternative in 12 months or so. In >2 years time finally PalmLinux arrives - with an equally warm response from "the market", i.e. Palm(One) basically, as Cobalt received. In other words, in 2 years time there won't be any PalmOS devices left on the market. How could the original Palm screw this up so much? RE: Sticking out aerials are bad design
Bad design or not, the marketing people over at Redmond must be filling their pants over this. No doubt they will retaliate with yet another FUD campaign here at PIC. They're desperate, so who knows what sort of lies we will be subjected to next. RE: Sticking out aerials are bad design
I agree - not only is the sticking out aerial a bad idea, but palm really need to get some design cues from the rest of the world - europe, actually. Americans and corps may be happy with the clunky design, but it just doesn't cut it in polite company. RE: Sticking out aerials are bad design
I am no more happy with antenni than any one else here (my SE T616 is quite the proof). I just know (from asking the sources why, and getting answers). Are American dumber - your call, but I say yes and I am one :) Are carriers taking advantage of people that are afriad to do a lil bit of homework and actually make an informed purchase - I'd say yes there too. COntrary to what I 'want to believe' this view of the 700 seems more realistic. Whether it is or not, I dont know (and when I will know I wont be able to say). Maybe chopping this rounded one in half will appease a few more folks; but who knows? We all care more about what is under the hood than what sticks out of it (I hope). RE: Sticking out aerials are bad design
I think the antenna might have something to do with the extra radiation that Sprint phones put out. http://Tapland.com - Tapwave Zodiac News, Reviews, & Discussion - RE: Sticking out aerials are bad designfishtastic @ 8/15/2005 2:46:12 PM #
The reason why I I believe Palm has to lose the aerial is that by bringing out a WinMob phone it is going head to head with other WinMob hardware. It had to be better than the others if it expects to sell. How does the Treo stand up against wizard/galaxy/universal? Well with a big aerial, and I guess no wifi, it's going to look like the hick-redneck-ginger-haired-cousin. Fish RE: Sticking out aerials are bad designjamesgood72 @ 8/15/2005 2:48:34 PM #
Does anyone have any scientific information on why antennas are not required? Any radio engineers? I would prefer not to have one on my T650, but assumed Palm knew more about the complexities of antennas than me. So I didn't make sure rash comments as others above are making. :) -James. RE: Sticking out aerials are bad design
If it is really the carriers insisting upon it, then it is up to us to complain to them that their phones have these awkward and unnecessary external antennae. According to what I've read, the Moto Razr has excellent reception so that can't serve as the excuse. RE: Sticking out aerials are bad design
I bought my ladi the Moto Razr and its ok. Not the greatest, but ok. I do much better with my older, still no antenna weilding T616. mobileministrymagazine.blogspot.com antoinerjwright.com RE: Sticking out aerials are bad design
Palm knew more about the complexities of antennas than me That may be true but the point is RIM, HP, Qtek and E-Ten seem to know more about the complexities of antennas than Palm, as they're making devices similar in function to the Treos but with internal antennas. I have feeling that there was a time when external aerials provided better transmission and reception than internal aerials (maybe because of other electronics in the phone causing interference?) but now there's little or no difference because of improvements made in electronics. RE: Sticking out aerials are bad designPenguinPowered @ 8/15/2005 4:38:16 PM #
antennas are required. The question is whether an internal antenna is sufficient or an external antenna is required. It's not really so much about reception as it is about battery life. An internal antenna is somewhat less efficient as a transmit antenna than an external one. Normally, this doesn't matter much, since there are plenty of other sources of loss, but occassionally, it means that the phone will have to use more power to achieve an acceptable signal at the tower. This cuts battery life. All else being equal, a well designed external antenna is more efficent as a transmit antenna than an internal antenna. It's rare that all else is equal, so it's difficult to do head-to-head comparisons. RE: Sticking out aerials are bad design
It's not really a matter of antenna vs no antenna. They all have antennas. The question is, "do the engineers build the antenna into the design or outside it"? Tear you S/E or Nokia "antennaless" phone down and you'll see that the antenna is nomally housed in the upper portion of the casing above the display. Unlike most flip phones (usually a pull out antenna) with a small space above the screen, the "antennaless" candy bar phones usually have a little extra up there. That space is usually where the antenna resides with plenty of room so as not to hinder transmission/reception. Maybe they'll put a speaker, power button or Ir port up there, but usually plenty of air too. IMO, the "antennaless" design of my S/E T637 is far superior to the protruding type like the Treos. I really was hoping Palm would catch a clue and design the next gen this way, but I guess not. The real innovation was done by Hawkins and Co at Handspring. If Palm releases this "700", then it will cement the fact that they are hanging desperately to market share for today's $$$, at the expense of tommorrow's survival. "Antennaless" ... is that a word? RE: Sticking out aerials are bad designfishtastic @ 8/15/2005 8:14:33 PM #
The thing is that the RF performance of a Treo 600, for example, is inferior to that of a Nokia with an internal aerial. This is despite the SAR scores which are rather scary compared to Nokia. Next time you have your Treo open have a look at the aerial and then tell me it needs to stick out like it's got wood.... Fish Presenting the ultimate phone-centric smartphone design:The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/15/2005 10:55:32 PM #
IMO, the "antennaless" design of my S/E T637 is far superior to the protruding type like the Treos. I really was hoping Palm would catch a clue and design the next gen this way, but I guess not. Amen. And you can add the Sony Ericsson T608 to the list of phones with internal antennae and (much) better reception than the Treo. I think your antennaless Treo design is the best I've seen so far for a smartphone: http://churchoflivingfaith.com/images/treo800big.jpg
The Palm Economy = Communism™ RE: Sticking out aerials are bad design
Ahhhh, the Treo 800g ... Palm would have absorbed M$, S/E & Nokia already had they released her. Man that has to be the killer device of the decade. Pat Horne; www.churchoflivingfaith.com RE: Sticking out aerials are bad design
I have a treo 600 i'm prepared to hack. I'm thinking of maybe removing the external antenna - I believe smallish flat (fractal?) antennas are available. Anyone tried this, or have any ideas why this may or may not work ? The reception is already pretty terrible, I can't see it getting any worse by replacing the antenna with a real phone company's (eg nokia) one ... RE: Sticking out aerials are bad design
Hack it and get one of those stckers that goes on the back for recpeption increase. :-D Or go the safe route and just get the 480v! RE: Sticking out aerials are bad design
I was thinking of saving some cash, and just painting an antenna pattern onto the cover with a silver marker pen :) RE: Sticking out aerials are bad design
aaa.... major check, the main argument is that palm is no maker of mobile phones. How many phones have they made so far? 2? hahhhahah.... to me thats a hell of experience...(sarcasm)
 Horrible Photoshop job
I can't believe this one's getting so much play. This is a horrible Photoshop job. The rounded corners are the work of the airbrush tool in the hands of an unskilled user. And let's hope that the next Treo device is a bit more interesting and different than simply rounding some corners. RE: Horrible Photoshop job
Hey, we all know its a PS job. The ironic part is that its a BELIEVABLE PS job. And who knows, if it runs something other than Garnet, it would be worth getting :) mobileministrymagazine.blogspot.com antoinerjwright.com RE: Horrible Photoshop job
> I can't believe this one's getting so much play. This is a > horrible Photoshop job. The rounded corners are the work of > the airbrush tool in the hands of an unskilled user. Horrible photoshop job or not, the question is whether this is a "mockup" from Palm or some hoax. Oliver
RE: Horrible Photoshop jobMonkeyMike @ 9/6/2005 6:04:10 PM #
Well, the statistics say there's a 99% chance it's a hoax... And they really need to lose the external antenna. I'm looking to replace my zire 72 and k700 with one device, but it won't be something with an external antenna...
-- http://arpx.net/docs/top_10_palmos_applications - my top 10 palm apps.
No news
It's a bad picture that looks too much like a Treo 650 to be worth reporting as a possible design for a Treo 700. I wouldn't have thought this worthy of publication. Perhaps there is no real news today? At least Palm didn't change its name again, or have another CEO quit. RE: No news
... and if Palm announces it Jan. 10th, then you'll post the following I'm sure ...
"It seemed a bad picture that looked too much like a Treo 650 to be worth reporting as a possible design for a Treo 700. I wouldn't have thought this worthy of publication. Perhaps, I thot, there was no real news that day? At least Palm didn't change its name again, or have another CEO quit. Nevertheless, PalmInfocenter showed us all why we love it so much. They were able to navigate through all the rumors, hoaxs and spy photos to bring us the Treo 700 over 4 months before this Palm press release was reported by CNet and others. Thanks Ryan for taking the risk back then and furthermore for having the expertise to "seperate the sheep from the goats" concerning Palm rumors. By the way, I'm sending $100 to your PayPal account as a token of my appreciation". :-)
More than 32MB RAM?
I hope that they put more than 32MB RAM (~24MB Usable) in this puppy. "32MB RAM ain't good enough for anybody." RE: More than 32MB RAM?
At least 64MB (56MB Useable) or 128MB (120MB Useable) Ram would be nice. Now give the Treo a well-polished, smooth-touch Anodized Aluminum Metal Casing so that the insides of the Treo can cool down. Plastic traps heat and no one can afford to see the insides fry apart thanks to plastic. Treos need to use cooling metal cases to cool the insides of the handheld (especially the Battery) in a hurry. RE: More than 32MB RAM?
Well, there are 217 1280x1024 photos left so you could do the math ;-)
- No aerial. RE: More than 32MB RAM?
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.... memory.... good idea. I wonder what it would be like to have a Treo with a reasonable amount of RAM - bet you could actually USE some of those fancy programs like Handmark Express, Documents to Go, IBM Websphere, etc that are too much struggle to fit and work on the 650 and before (unless that's ALL you use)....
RE: More than 32MB RAM?AdamaDBrown @ 8/14/2005 4:09:53 AM #
WM doesn't require 128 MB RAM, it can make do with 32. In any event, if you assume that the average size of the photos is 200-250 KB, then multiply by 217, and take the next standard RAM figure above that (allowing for overhead), then this image depicts a device with 64 MB of memory. RE: More than 32MB RAM?PenguinPowered @ 8/14/2005 4:22:35 AM #
I've got a Linux distro running on an ARM device that uses 4MB of ROM for the file system and just under 3MB of ram for the footprint of a running system. Nice, fast, useful. RE: More than 32MB RAM?fishtastic @ 8/14/2005 9:40:51 AM #
AdamaDBrown said "WM doesn't require 128 MB RAM, it can make do with 32." Hhmmm, the Moto MPX(300) proved that your can take a nicely designed phone and cripple it with 32 MB of ram. Every review of it said nice phone needs more memory, (and a faster cpu). In the end it got canned mainly because it was unuseable with that little memory. 64MB is the real minimum for WM, obviuosly WM5 has is interesting because you need to get the mix of flash and real memory right. Fish RE: More than 32MB RAM?
With WM5, 32MB real ram = 64Mb ram shared equally between Storage (32MB) and Program(32Mb) usage in Wm2003SE. Of course with wm2003se 64MB is still a tight squeeze, but its perfectly usable for the vast majority of people. Personally I believe WM5 is much much delayed, and the Mpx was meant to be launched with it. Even the Axim and HP devices were meant to be launched with WM 5. Its finally here now however, so I hope it has been worth the wait, and they used all that time to debug it properly. Surur RE: More than 32MB RAM?
>With WM5, 32MB real ram = 64Mb ram shared equally between Storage (32MB) and Program(32Mb) usage in Wm2003SE. WTF does this mean? RE: More than 32MB RAM?
Kinda looks familiar.... Oh yeah, I remember now. It must be something similar to the LD memory scheme. "Sure we have 64 mb of RAM. That's 32 mb of real RAM and 32 mb of make-believe RAM for a total of 64 mb of 'perceived RAM'. Just use your imagination." Its finally here now however, so I hope it has been worth the wait, and they used all that time to debug it properly. Speaking of make-believe, when was the last time you remember that happening? RE: More than 32MB RAM?
What is MSFT's minimum RAM mandate for WinMob5 licensees? And how is it broken up? RE: More than 32MB RAM?PenguinPowered @ 8/14/2005 12:57:12 PM #
You don't want to know the minimum numbers. You want to know the recommended numbers, which in m$ case are usually 2-3 times the minimums. RE: More than 32MB RAM?
>You want to know the recommended numbers, which in m$ case are usually 2-3 times the minimums. nothing wrong with this. i like that MSFT madates high RAM - and they do it for good reason. for all the talk from Nagel and the MORONS at PSRC talking about giving licensees flexibility to essentially do whatever the hell they want - that's why were friggin stuck with a 24 MB RAM TREO at the TOP END!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! there is something to be said to OS companies mandating a certain RAM number. it's called USER EXPERIENCE. Presenting the Miraculous MartyOS: here to save the day.The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/14/2005 1:38:31 PM #
RE: More than 32MB RAM? PenguinPowered @ 8/14/2005 4:22:35 AM # I've got a Linux distro running on an ARM device that uses 4MB of ROM for the file system and just under 3MB of ram for the footprint of a running system. Nice, fast, useful.
PalmSource are currently desperately looking for people + companies that can help them figure out how to bring PalmLinux to life. Desperate companies can be taken advantage of by those with the (Linux) sk!11z + products the company needs*. I hope you're not taking advantage of PalmSource, Mr. Fouts. [*Anyone remember how PalmSource Board member JL Gassée tried to screw Apple by inflating his asking price for BeOS when Apple desperately needed a new OS? Ironic, isn't it?] TVoR The Palm Economy = Communism™ RE: More than 32MB RAM?
Why Palm will succeed, and Microsoft will fail – Palmsource CEO By John Lettice Published Tuesday 12th November 2002 13:14 GMT Armed with an impressive pile of research data, Palmsource CEO Dave Nagel mounted something of a troop-rallying exercise in London yesterday, and quite convincing it was too. But then you'd expect no less from a sometime industry demigod. It is not the case that the Palm platform is dead, doomed, about to be eclipsed by Redmond, says Nagel, unleashing another battery of heavy-duty Gartner - au contraire, it's in fine fettle, and Microsoft is maiming itself by trying to apply the wrong industry model to the handheld device business. The wrong industry model in question is of course the PC one. In Nagel's view the only surviving name in the PC business that makes a profit is Dell, and this has been caused by Microsoft's commoditisation of the market. Similarly, Microsoft is now applying fairly rigid platform standards to the PDA and phone business (and in the latter case is even specifically attempting to unleash a wave of no-name cloners). Manufacturers going the Microsoft way therefore have little scope for differentiation, are forced to compete on price, and will get killed. Not that many of them are doing so - while the already-anointed PC ringwraiths have moved into the PocketPC market, the handset companies have looked at the model, looked at the history books and beaten a swift retreat. But we've done this one before, haven't we? In the (still pretty convincing) world according to Nagel, the PC model won't work, the Palmsource approach of having a looser set of standards for a looser coalition of licensees will, and furthermore, having those licensees innovate and then put the results back into the pile means the Palmsource platform can and will develop faster than the Microsoft one. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/11/12/why_palm_will_succeed/ RE: More than 32MB RAM?
With WM5, 32MB real ram = 64Mb ram shared equally between Storage (32MB) and Program(32Mb) usage in Wm2003SE. Currently, on a 64Mb PPC, the ram is divided between storage and program execution ram. Usually its divided equally, with 32Mb going for storage, and 32Mb for execution. This can however be changed dynamically by the OS, depending on need. Basically however it means most wm2003se devices run within 32Mb ram. This means in theory a WM5 device with 32Mb real ram (all dedicated to execution which is the new setup in WM5) is equivalent to a 64MB WM2003SE unit. Of course the more ram the better, but 32Mb should be quite usable, as most devices have been getting along with it for quite a long time. Of course I prefer having much more ram than I need, which is why I have a 128Mb device. Sorry, did not know you guys knew so little about WM devices. Surur Look how Nagel managed to twist everything to suit his needsThe_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/14/2005 3:30:06 PM #
Why Palm will succeed, and Microsoft will fail – Palmsource CEO By John Lettice Published Tuesday 12th November 2002 13:14 GMT Armed with an impressive pile of research data, Palmsource CEO Dave Nagel mounted something of a troop-rallying exercise in London yesterday, and quite convincing it was too. But then you'd expect no less from a sometime industry demigod. It is not the case that the Palm platform is dead, doomed, about to be eclipsed by Redmond, says Nagel, unleashing another battery of heavy-duty Gartner - au contraire, it's in fine fettle, and Microsoft is maiming itself by trying to apply the wrong industry model to the handheld device business. The wrong industry model in question is of course the PC one. In Nagel's view the only surviving name in the PC business that makes a profit is Dell, and this has been caused by Microsoft's commoditisation of the market. Similarly, Microsoft is now applying fairly rigid platform standards to the PDA and phone business (and in the latter case is even specifically attempting to unleash a wave of no-name cloners). Manufacturers going the Microsoft way therefore have little scope for differentiation, are forced to compete on price, and will get killed. Not that many of them are doing so - while the already-anointed PC ringwraiths have moved into the PocketPC market, the handset companies have looked at the model, looked at the history books and beaten a swift retreat. But we've done this one before, haven't we? In the (still pretty convincing) world according to Nagel, the PC model won't work, the Palmsource approach of having a looser set of standards for a looser coalition of licensees will, and furthermore, having those licensees innovate and then put the results back into the pile means the Palmsource platform can and will develop faster than the Microsoft one. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/11/12/why_palm_will_succeed/ What Nagel seems to have for gotten is you can take the next step down his "logic" pathway and say Linux would be even MORE attractive than PalmOS since it's "free", even more "open" and ANYONE - not just licensees - are able to "innovate and then put the results back into the pile". Looks like Nagel got bitten in the a$$ with his own orument and was too busy trying to rationalize Cobalt to see that it was doomed to fail. It's amazing that a OS using a proprietary kernel like Cobalt was even conceived in the first place as potentially being able to stave off Microsoft's World Domination Tour. Then again, given the arrogance rampant among executives at Palm over the years, maybe it's not too surprising... Sorry, did not know you guys knew so little about WM devices. Classic, Surur. Classic.
The Palm Economy = Communism™ RE: More than 32MB RAM?The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/14/2005 3:54:06 PM #
"orument" = arguement
You often trot out Gates' quote about companies quickly going into a downward spiral. It seems Palm/PalmSource are intent on making Gates look smart by proving him correct. It's a shame that Palm somehow managed to squander a HUGE amount of money, a stranglehold on the marketplace, a great product and a several year head start on the competition and just handed over the market to Microsoft. It's almost as if Microsoft has had someone in charge at Palm working for them all along, sabotaging Palm every step of the way... The Palm Economy = Communism™ RE: More than 32MB RAM?AdamaDBrown @ 8/14/2005 8:03:53 PM #
64MB is the real minimum for WM, obviuosly WM5 has is interesting because you need to get the mix of flash and real memory right. Not quite. You can actually run WM2003 SE on as little as 21 MB of RAM (excluding, for the moment, the question of storage memory and talking exclusively about execution RAM). For ideal operation, 32 MB is preferred. Most mid-range and high-end WM5 devices will likely have 64 MB. To put the whole thing in Palm OS terms, a PocketPC that comes with 64 MB of RAM is divided into 32 MB of storage memory and 32 MB of heap. This can be adjusted to give one side or the other more room. RE: More than 32MB RAM?PenguinPowered @ 8/14/2005 9:09:50 PM #
my, my, aren't we having fun. Pulling out nearly three year old interviews with the former PalmSource CEO. I guess that's what the trolls here do do when they realize no one is falling for their ranting. By the way TVoR, the linux distro I described is available completely free and completely in open source. Anyone who cares can pick the source off of a couple of web sites, compile it, and have their very own royalty-free ARM Linux running on any of a number of platforms in a few hours. (How long it takes depends on how old the box you compile on is.) Gotta wonder what Bill and Steve are thinking about maemo. Probably nothing, as m$ has never taken the embedded market seriously. Gotta wonder what the first GSM successor to the 770 is going to be like. RE: More than 32MB RAM?PenguinPowered @ 8/14/2005 9:22:04 PM #
> Sounds like something ... PalmSource could use. ... Why don't > you do everyone a favor and license this miraculous > OS, "MartyOS" to PalmSource? Poor TVoR; confused again. You misspelled "Linux", and Linus has already licensed it to PalmSource -- and anyone that cares to obey the GPL. And if you think the footprint I described is 'miraculous', than it appears you haven't any real experience with OSes for embedded systems. Until recently, a 6mb footprint for an embedded OS would have been considered outrageously large. has M$ done any good for the industry? Sure. they've bloated their way to being the backbone that drives the need for more memory and faster cpus to do the same old thing. Sad, really, unless you're Intel. RE: More than 32MB RAM?
PenguinPowered said Gotta wonder what Bill and Steve are thinking about maemo. Probably nothing, as m$ has never taken the embedded market seriously. I guess thats why MS was the leading embedded OS vendor in 2004. http://www.internetnews.com/wireless/article.php/3435501 Surur ARMLinux... Wherefore art thou?The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/15/2005 10:22:31 AM #
I guess thats why MS was the leading embedded OS vendor in 2004. http://www.internetnews.com/wireless/article.php/3435501 Surur You'd think Marty would get tired of making himself look like a fool. But you'd be wrong. Marty, do yourself a favor and THINK before you post next time. I'm almost starting to feel sorry for your pathetic Linux-pumping a$$. By the way, unless things have changed recently, ARMLinux is a VERY amateurish work in progress that's been kept (barely) alive by a pretty limited group of hobbyist programmers. Surprising, given the amount of ARM hardware out there. Maybe - as with Linux on the desktop - most people simply have no need for Linux on PDAs. Until someone makes Linux painless to use (as PalmLinux could have been in theory) it will remain For Geeks Only. Sorry, Bubba. Try again. TVoR
The Palm Economy = Communism™ RE: More than 32MB RAM?PenguinPowered @ 8/15/2005 3:13:06 PM #
Poor TVoR. Confused again. Your knowledge of ARM Linux is on a par with your knowledge of PalmSource. You really have to stop getting your industry news from the National Enquirer. I guess that's why so much of your trolling consists of insults and none of it ever consists of actual responses to comments people raise. kinda reminds me of my grandkids, when they're tired, trying to get attention from the adults. By the way, surur, looking over that internetnews article was fun. It appears that they and the Gartner group have made the same mistake in defining 'embedded' very narrowly. If you define it narrowly enough, sure enough, m$ took the 'lead' in q4 04. hint: pdas and cell phones are a tiny fraction of the embedded space. But please don't confuse 'better' with 'more popular'. VHS is more popular than BetaMax, after all. RE: More than 32MB RAM?
My PenguinPowered, you spout a lot of nonsense. Your rationalizations dont know any bounds. http://linuxdevices.com/news/NS8800432563.html Devices, by embedded OS Device Category.....Windows Embedded....Embedded Linux http://linuxdevices.com/articles/AT2631993452.html And this (MS funded) study should be of interest to palmsource. Microsoft-funded report claims embedding Linux costs more than embedding Windows Updated Sep. 11, 2003] -- A report released in July, 2003 by market research firm Embedded Market Forecasters (EMF) claims embedded development projects based on Microsoft's "Windows Embedded" operating system platforms (specifically, Windows CE .NET and Windows XP Embedded) are completed 43% faster and at 68% lower cost, on average, compared with similar projects using Embedded Linux. http://linuxdevices.com/news/NS8800432563.html For PalmSource's sake they better hope this study is very biased. Surur RE: More than 32MB RAM?PenguinPowered @ 8/15/2005 4:24:41 PM #
Surur, your numbers have nothing to do with with anything other than describing that if you count 'devices' from a very well specified subset of embedded devices, there are more embedded Linux devices than embeded windows devices. Coupled with your earlier pointer to the article that quoted from the Gartner group, it's a good demonstration of how you can make the numbers come out how you want them based on what definitions you use. I am amused by the definition of "total cost of development" in the cost study. Especially how it excludes much of the cost of developing an embedded device by simply ignoring all of the hardware development costs. It's a good example of FUD too, since it doesn't compare time to market, BOM, or other factors that embedded device success tend to be far more sensitive to than cost of software development. Ain't it great what you can appear to make the numbers say if you're selective in specifying what goes into them? You're a bright lad, it seems. If you care about more than trolling and pretending to be a true believer, you need to start getting your information from more independent, better qualified sources. RE: More than 32MB RAM?
I'm aware that MS funded numbers will not convince anyone, but that table from LinuxDevices.com demonstrates that Windows Embedded is used in more than "pdas and cell phones" which are "a tiny fraction of the embedded space." Many of the things you appear to believe are just plain wrong. I hope to educate you past your seeming prejudices. Maybe you should keep a closer eye on the competition. http://www.windowsembeddeddevices.com/ Surur RE: More than 32MB RAM?
The report estimates "total cost of development" for each project by multiplying the average embedded design project time-to-market by the software engineering team size and cost. I have read a few articles lately (none of which I am going to go back and reference; you can find them too if you care) in which company "A" using embedded Linux says exactly that; the total cost of development was slightly higher for them. But each one goes on to point out that the extra cost was made up multiple times over after the initial development. What is more important? Initial development cost or long-term profitability? Come on. You ask everyone else to be a "realist", but you find information put out by MS that is clearly designed to find the "perfect" combination of factors in which MS is superior to Linux in the embedded market. No, I do not believe the spin that Redmond puts out. RE: More than 32MB RAM?
dear apologists - the market has spoken. everything else is just conversation. RE: More than 32MB RAM?
POS certainly does not seem to care about time to market. Maybe they will recoup their massive development costs in their huge sales in 2008..... Surur RE: More than 32MB RAM?
I'm aware that MS funded numbers will not convince anyone.... I'm curious. Did they convince you? RE: More than 32MB RAM?
I would look for much more proof than that. I'm as cynical as you. I do believe however that MS at the moment can give you an out of the box solution much more easily (look at the Treo 670), but as time goes on and OS "kits" (with drivers for for standardized components and a few standard UI's) increasingly become available for Linux this advantage will diminish greatly. However I believe MS has the back-end workflow intra-operability advantage too, as they are often dealing with their own backend software. Surur RE: More than 32MB RAM?AdamaDBrown @ 8/15/2005 10:37:48 PM #
Out of curiousity, other than from a hardware developer's perspective, what does it matter that a router or a set-top box runs Windows or Linux? The user isn't going to care. I have a DVD player that runs Linux, and it's not like it's interfacing with my PCs. It's just a box. It's not really going to be any more open or intuitive regardless of what kernel it has. The thing could run Goose OS for all I care, as long as it performs the tasks for which it was purchased. The only embedded space where I see the OS making a real difference is devices where software compatibility and user experience become a factor: handhelds, phones, tablets, etcetera. What hurts Linux in these areas is that every manufacturer has their own spin on it. You can't just count embedded Linux devices, you have to break it down: how many with a QTopia shell, how many with a proprietary shell, etcetera. That's what keeps Linux down as a real competitor in the mobile space. Without a common UI and framework, you can't build the kind of application base you see in Palm and PocketPC. RE: More than 32MB RAM?
"Microsoft-funded report claims embedding Linux costs more than embedding Windows Updated Sep. 11, 2003] -- A report released in July, 2003 by market research firm Embedded Market Forecasters (EMF) claims embedded development projects based on Microsoft's "Windows Embedded" operating system platforms (specifically, Windows CE .NET and Windows XP Embedded) are completed 43% faster and at 68% lower cost, on average, compared with similar projects using Embedded Linux. The report includes data from a survey of 100 manufacturers using 32-bit processors in a range of embedded projects and applications -- 50 using various implementations of embedded Linux, and 50 using Microsoft's Windows Embedded platforms (Windows CE .NET and Windows XP Embedded). The devices and applications included in the source data reportedly covered consumer electronics, handheld computers, industrial controllers, network gateways, point-of-sale kiosks, set-top boxes, thin clients, and others. The report estimates "total cost of development" for each project by multiplying the average embedded design project time-to-market by the software engineering team size and cost." A two-year old report funded by Microsoft....wow, that's some research, sr4!!! RE: More than 32MB RAM?
"Microsoft-funded report claims embedding Linux costs more than embedding Windows Updated Sep. 11, 2003] -- A report released in July, 2003 by market research firm Embedded Market Forecasters (EMF) claims embedded development projects based on Microsoft's "Windows Embedded" operating system platforms (specifically, Windows CE .NET and Windows XP Embedded) are completed 43% faster and at 68% lower cost, on average, compared with similar projects using Embedded Linux. The report includes data from a survey of 100 manufacturers using 32-bit processors in a range of embedded projects and applications -- 50 using various implementations of embedded Linux, and 50 using Microsoft's Windows Embedded platforms (Windows CE .NET and Windows XP Embedded). The devices and applications included in the source data reportedly covered consumer electronics, handheld computers, industrial controllers, network gateways, point-of-sale kiosks, set-top boxes, thin clients, and others. The report estimates "total cost of development" for each project by multiplying the average embedded design project time-to-market by the software engineering team size and cost." A two-year old report funded by Microsoft....wow, that's some research, sr4!!! RE: More than 32MB RAM?PenguinPowered @ 8/16/2005 12:11:49 AM #
OK, let me slow it down for you. All of the devices in your example list belong in a very tiny part of the embedded system space. As a percentage of total embedded device by count they add up to 'miniscule'. Until very recently, when marketing folks redefined 'embedded' to make m$ look good, almost none of those things would even have been considered embedded systems. Most of them are more "minaturized restricted-function general purpose computer systems" then they are whan an embedded systems developer would consider to be an embedded system. There was a brief period when the term "computer appliance" was used to describe them. Don't confuse 'small' with 'embedded'. There are huge embedded systems and tiny non-embedded ones. Before people started confusing PDAs with embedded systems, 'embedded' meant that the processor substituted for purpose-built random logic, its presence wasn't noticable to the user, and the resulting device didn't behave like a general purpose computer with a limited set of applications. To most of the embedded community, that's still the definition. (Most people are surprised when they find out that they already own tens of embedded devices and never even knew it.) And don't confuse 'experience' with 'prejudice'. Everything I've written here comes from 30 years of successful experience developing systems, not from random wiki pages and m$ funded 'study' web sites. M$ has never done well in the embedded space because the devices didn't have the power necessary to support stripped down general purpose OSes, which is what every M$ attempt at an "embedded" OS has been. Moore's law is the OS designer's friend, and we're very close to the time when "embedded" systems can run general purpose OSes and cope with the generality and genericity that makes them slower and require more hardware than purpose-designed systems. PalmOS's irony is that like MacOS, it suffers from having been designed for hardware about two generations before what was suitable for what the OS was meant for. MacOS suffered horrible limitations because of its need to fit the hardware/software budget of the original beige box, but succeded because it fit those limitations spectacularly well. The same thing with PalmOS and the original moto based PDAs. Like MacOS, the hardware grew up faster than the software, and like MacOS, PalmOS is aged and showing wear. Apple managed to pull of OS/X. Although, ironically, it then decided to abandon the computer business. Will PalmSource be able to pull of son-of-PalmOS using Linux the way that Apple used Mach? My crystal ball's fuzzy. Stay tuned for more developments. RE: More than 32MB RAM?AdamaDBrown @ 8/16/2005 1:32:32 AM #
Apple managed to pull of OS/X. Although, ironically, it then decided to abandon the computer business. Um. Did I miss a news article, or something? Apple has abandoned the computer business? Or are you suggesting that because they're switching to Intel processors, their only interest now will be selling software? RE: More than 32MB RAM?PenguinPowered @ 8/16/2005 2:41:53 AM #
I doubt they're going to announce it, but Apple's a CE company, not a computer company, thanks to IPOD. Eventually the truebelievers will realize what that means. RE: More than 32MB RAM?
A Palm unit with 32mb of RAM can use nearly 32mb of ram to store software. A PocketPC unit with 32mb of RAM will use 16mb of ram for storage and the other 16mb for runtime. And actually, with only 16mb of RAM you will quickly get programs complaining that there is not enough RAM available to run if you use it for a while and run program after program. If you had 16mb or RAM ... well, a PocketPC is just screwed and people with Palm would still run fine. A PocketPC runs just like a normal computer .. you have to have RAM to RUN your programs, and a place to store your software. You can pick and choose (by using a slider) how much RAM is for runtime and how much is for storage though. (I also have Ipaq h5455) RE: More than 32MB RAM?
WM 5 changes this, as explained above. http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8026#110764 Surur One of the few honest statements made here by Mr. Fouts:The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/20/2005 12:22:49 PM #
I doubt they're going to announce it, but Apple's a CE company, not a computer company, thanks to IPOD. Eventually the truebelievers will realize what that means. Funny how Marty can be brutally honest about Apple, yet somehow can't bring himself to speak the truth about PalmSource. I guess that PalmSource paycheck might have something to do with his mendacity... The Palm Economy = Communism™ RE: More than 32MB RAM?PenguinPowered @ 8/20/2005 1:58:30 PM #
Poor TVoR, confused again. I don't know which is funnier though, your anonymous preoccupation with guessing other people's identities, or the selectiveness of your memory. If you spent as much time getting your facts straight as you spend posting insults, you wouldn't have to be corrected nearly so often. I do enjoy the amount of window you generate each time you've corrected, though Skippy. But a word of advice: most people will read that sort of whining as adolescent pouting in response to having been corrected. As someone who seems to think this is some kind of debate, do you really want to leave that impression with the readers? RE: More than 32MB RAM?The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/20/2005 4:19:46 PM #
Marty, you're sounding more and more flustered with every post you make. Should we insert a nervous laugh from you every few lines? I was actually complimenting you on an insightful post about Apple, but if you choose to take this as an insult, be my guest. The Palm Economy = Communism™ RE: More than 32MB RAM?AdamaDBrown @ 8/20/2005 8:40:53 PM #
I wouldn't call Apple a CE company. Their business, first and foremost, is selling style. The iPod isn't very competitive from a strict CE standpoint, but it sells well, because it's stylish. Likewise, their computers are unbelievably expensive, but they sell because they're well designed. None of Apples products, whether it's the iPod or the Airport Express, are particularly innovative, they're just well done.
RE: cool compass...
A compass won't help if you hike yourself off the map that you are carrying. My girlfriend (at the time, now wife) did that, and we wandered for a long time around looking for trails and footprints for clues to get to Yosemite Falls. GPS is the way to go.
Palm JUMPED THE SHARK when...The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/18/2005 5:33:25 AM #
Palm "jumped the shark" when the m505 was prematurely announced. The Vx was the high point of Palm's run of successes and it's been all downhill since the m505 was hyped and failed to live up to "thousands" of [colors ;-O] expectations. The PalmOS platform "jumped the shark" when Sony released the CLIE UX50. It's easily the most innovative PDA ever released, and it's been (mostly) all downhill for the platform ever since the UX50 came out. TVoR The Palm Economy = Communism™ PalmSource is predicting a ROUGH RIDE ahead....The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/19/2005 1:27:29 AM #
"Outlook for fiscal year 2006: We anticipate revenue will be negatively impacted on a year-over-year basis by factors such as Sony’s exit from the PDA market, the pre-pay of one licensee’s royalty minimum, and the expiration of certain prepaid royalties that were being amortized on a quarterly basis."
The Palm Economy = Communism™ RE: Palm JUMPED THE SHARK when...PenguinPowered @ 8/19/2005 2:31:48 AM #
that's old news, there skippy. No wonder your picture of PalmSource is so confused, if your knowledge is that far out of date. RE: Palm JUMPED THE SHARK when...
I'd have to disagree with "skippy". The M515 (released to fixed the problems of the M505) was the pinnacle of the Palm PDA thusfar. The Vx itself was a modification to the Palm V which Palm (typically) released with too little memory - and after eveyone was clamoring for third party warranty busting mods Palm "innovated" an 8MB chip into the Palm V. The M515 had a similar form factor and metal casing, but with the addition of a readable color screen, an SDIO slot for backups and the like, 8 times the memory of the Palm V, OS4, vibrating alarms, and USB syncing via the "universal" connector. But after that, I'd agree that little real improvement has been made to the Palm PDA. Basically the Pros are: OS5, cheap cameras, (so-so) attempts to build Outlook syncing into the installer, and high-res screens (probably the biggest improvement). The Cons: removal of vibrating alarms, cheap plastic and/or scratch-and-sniff casing, sliding hardware built so poorly it begins losing screws within a month, Graffiti 2 (aaargh!!), switch to NVFS while maintaining similar amounts of RAM 5 years later... It appears the same crew that bungled up the beauty that was the M515 have had free reign to ruin the Treo that Palm inherited from the Handspring purchase. At least I give them credit for putting the SDIO slot in the correct direction on the Treo 650... RE: Palm JUMPED THE SHARK when...The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/19/2005 11:06:50 PM #
that's old news...
I wish you PalmSource employees would devote as much energy toward fixing the OS as you do trying to Astroturf on the various Palm sites. By the way, has Dianne Hackborn given PalmSource notice that she's leaving the company yet? Watch the rats flee the sinking ship. First one. Then another. Then another. And another... The Palm Economy = Communism™ PalmSource only has enough money to last 12 more monthsThe_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/19/2005 11:18:56 PM #
Assuming continued current rate of cash burn + no new revenue streams, PalmSource will run out of money sometime next Fall. Since PalmLinux will not be ready at that point and most of the licensees PalmSource had at the beginning of 2005 will be gone by Fall 2006, how the he11 does PalmSource expect to survive as an independent company? Maybe they could sell Palm the rights to the name "PalmSource" for $30 million? How about anothe stock offering? In reality, they knew PalmSource was doomed to fail from the beginning. It was all part of the plan. Looks like the bogus Palm "split" is about to come to an end one year earlier than I had originally expected. I'll try not to say "I told you so" too many times. Colligan and Co. played it perfectly. Brilliant. I wonder if any Palm execs have previously worked for Enron...
The Palm Economy = Communism™ RE: Palm JUMPED THE SHARK when...PenguinPowered @ 8/19/2005 11:30:56 PM #
> PalmOS is an old OS. There hasn't been a new OS since Research Edition 8. > I wish you PalmSource employees would devote as much energy Poor confused TVoR. Sorry, Skippy, but I don't astroturf (aren't you using a trademark adejective as a verb, there skippy?) and I'm not involved in fixing PalmOS. You're not very good at guessing who people are and what they do, there Skippy. > By the way, has Dianne Hackborn given PalmSource notice that Poor TVoR. Fixating on Hackborn again. I take it 'Dianne Hackborn' and 'Michael Mace' are the only two PalmSource related names you're familiar with? You'd think someone who'd been to the developers conference would be able to identify some names of folk more closely associated with PalmLinux. By the way, it is cute the way you've jumped into so many threads to post your stale news about PalmSource financials. Another correction for you. PalmSource didn't make that announcement this week. They made it a couple of months ago. Poor Skippy. Not even up to date on the press releases. RE: Palm JUMPED THE SHARK when...
In my opinion there have been 4 watershed design moments from Palm Inc/PalmOne/Handspring: 1. Pilot 1000 (the original) 2. Palm V (never mind the lack of RAM etc) 3. m500 line 4. Treo 600 While 2 & 3 could arguably be lumped together, the m5xx really needs to receive credit, as joad said, for perfecting the phenomenal Palm V formfactor. It's still the first thing that springs to my (and many others') mind when someone says "PDA" (Yes, the Vx was what the V should have originally been, just as the m515 was what the m505 should've been and there should've been a subsequent m525 model with OS5, no BT, and a good 160*160 color LCD launched alongside the T|T in '02 etc etc). The four designs above are simply milestones in the brief history of pocket computing. Palm will be hard-pressed to follow any of them up as they are simply content to keep cobbling out cookie-cutter knockoffs of Treos and T|E series variants. Correcting some bad arithmeticPenguinPowered @ 8/19/2005 11:40:55 PM #
> Assuming continued current rate of cash burn + no new revenue > streams, PalmSource will run out of money sometime next Fall. Poor skippy, can't even do his arithmetic right. I guess it's that old information. First off skippy, "next fall" is six weeks away, not a year. I think you meant to type "Fall '06." But even then, you haven't been paying attention. Given the current burn rate, PalmSource has enough cash to get through 2Q '07. > Since PalmLinux will not be ready at that point and most of From a false premise, any conclusion may be arrived at, there Skippy. > Maybe they could sell Palm the rights to the Um, no Skippy, it wasn't part of the plan. Of all your fantasies, this one about "the plan" is the one that brings me the most chuckles. > Looks like the bogus Palm "split" is about to come to an end Well, yeah, except that reality intrudes. You need to catch up on your news releases there Skippy. New licensees have been announced, along with new revenue sources. Also, your math on the burn rate is wrong by 3 quarters. (Hint: you don't seem to be taking CMS into account.) RE: Palm JUMPED THE SHARK when...AdamaDBrown @ 8/20/2005 12:04:56 AM #
(aren't you using a trademark adejective as a verb, there skippy?) "Astroturfing" is a phrase coined to describe the use of paid employees to create fake grassroots support for a thing or a company. It's a practice particularly prevalent in the oil, tobacco, and pharmaceutical industries, but it's also been used extensively in politics (USA Next), and technology (Microsoft US antitrust trial). I'm shocked you've never heard of the term. RE: Palm JUMPED THE SHARK when...AdamaDBrown @ 8/20/2005 12:16:37 AM #
New licensees have been announced, along with new revenue sources. Also, your math on the burn rate is wrong by 3 quarters. (Hint: you don't seem to be taking CMS into account.) Licensees? Plural? I only see LG, and until they produce actual hardware, the revenue from them has got to be minimal. I can't imagine that CMS is so vastly profitable that they'll have spare tens of millions to throw at PSRC either. RE: Palm JUMPED THE SHARK when...PenguinPowered @ 8/20/2005 1:56:56 AM #
> "Astroturfing" is a phrase coined to describe the use of paid > employees to create fake grassroots support for a thing or a > company. I thought that's how skippy was using it. I am definitely not one of those. As mentioned before, I've never worked for an employer insane enough to think I'd post anything but my own opinion, nor dumb enough to pay me to post. > I'm shocked you've never heard of the term. Me too. Ah well, it's a big culture and you learn something new every day. RE: Palm JUMPED THE SHARK when...PenguinPowered @ 8/20/2005 1:59:04 AM #
> Licensees? Plural? I only see LG, and until they produce > actual hardware, the revenue from them has got to be minimal. My bad. Licensee. But one of the things Skippy seems to have missed is that Palm renewed its license and there is revenue slated before the end of next year. > I can't imagine that CMS is so vastly profitable that they'll When thinking in terms of burn rate, move the decimal one the other way. It doesn't take tens of millions to get through a month. Astroturfing definition [for Marty Fouts]The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/20/2005 11:42:56 AM #
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing
Cut the B.S., Bubba. Even Mr. T would pity you. TVoR The Palm Economy = Communism™ RE: Palm JUMPED THE SHARK when...The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/20/2005 12:27:16 PM #
> PalmOS is an old OS. There hasn't been a new OS since Research Edition 8. Too bad all consumers can get is decrepit, wheezy, unstable, hacked-up, kludgy, bug-infested PalmOS 5. Let's see: PalmOS 6 (Cobalt) STILL isn't available in a shipping device almost TWO YEARS after it was supposedly released. PalmOS 7 (PalmLinux) is still on the drawing board, in the early stages of development. I guess it makes sense that PalmSource divert as much of its infinite codemonkey resources towards development of PalmOS 8 (the one that finally introduces the long-awaited Alien Technology™ PalmSource obtained when they bought Be from (current PalmSource Board Director! Hmmmmm...) JL Gassée). > I wish you PalmSource employees would devote as much energy Poor confused TVoR. Sorry, Skippy, but I don't astroturf (aren't you using a trademark adejective as a verb, there skippy?) and I'm not involved in fixing PalmOS. You're not very good at guessing who people are and what they do, there Skippy. No, you're confused. Skippy is the poor PalmSource intern in charge with the minor responsibility of maintaining PalmOS versions 4, 5 and 6 while all the other codemonkeys work on PalmOS 7 (PalmLinux) and PalmOS 8 (derived from Be's Top Secret E.T.OS). Try to keep up, Marty. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing > By the way, has Dianne Hackborn given PalmSource notice that Poor TVoR. Fixating on Hackborn again. I take it 'Dianne Hackborn' and 'Michael Mace' are the only two PalmSource related names you're familiar with? You'd think someone who'd been to the developers conference would be able to identify some names of folk more closely associated with PalmLinux. Funny how you don't seem to have answered the question, Marty. A little bird told me Dianne is waving BuhBye! to PalmSource. Why would that be, Marty? Why? Why? Why? By the way, it is cute the way you've jumped into so many threads to post your stale news about PalmSource financials. Another correction for you. PalmSource didn't make that announcement this week. They made it a couple of months ago. Poor Skippy. Not even up to date on the press releases. Actually, I don't deal with press releases, Marty. But PalmSource FINALLY filed their latest 10-K August 17. Is that fresh enough for you? Some higlights (lowlights?) - The following list details some of our licensees who were actively shipping or developing Palm Powered products as of July 20, 2005: - As of July 20, 2005, we had a total of 518 employees, of which, 383 were in engineering and product development, 66 were in finance, administration and operations, 43 were in sales and marketing and 26 were in support and service. [I wonder if more than 10% of those "Magnificent 383" are competent.] - In fiscal 2005, recognizing the maturing of our core PDA business, we began transitioning our business model to address potential new growth opportunities in the broader phone market. As part of this transition, we announced a restructuring on June 29, 2005 that had two objectives. The first was to focus and streamline our product development activities and accelerate the integration of our China-based engineering resources into our global product development efforts. The second objective was to align our cost structure with the anticipated revenue decline in fiscal 2006. This included a 16 percent reduction in our U.S. headcount, over half of which were middle to senior managers, mainly in our product development groups. In addition to the cost savings related to the headcount reductions, we took steps to reduce discretionary spending in areas such as travel and the use of contractors and consultants, which when combined with a decline in stock compensation expense, is expected to substantially reduce overall expenses in fiscal 2006 when compared to fiscal 2005. A $2.7 million charge for employee termination benefits was taken in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2005 related to our cost cutting initiatives. [Translation: PDA sales have nosedived. Time to trim the fat, make a smartphone OS and wait until we get bought out in 2006. And we promise to stop expensing those triple martini lunches!] Fiscal year 2005 Fiscal year 2004 [Call me crazy, but I think I see a definite trend in PalmSource's stock price. Can you say "Asymptote"? http://www.answers.com/topic/asymptote] - As of July 25, 2005, we had approximately 2,400 registered stockholders of record. PalmSource has not paid and does not anticipate paying cash dividends in the near future. [Translation: Thanks for your money! Suckers!!!] - In April 2004, we completed a firm commitment underwritten public offering of 3,450,000 shares of our Common Stock... the net proceeds from the offering were approximately $57.4 million. In June 2004, we applied $13.1 million of the net proceeds of the offering held in money market funds to prepay the 5% convertible subordinated note due to Texas Instruments. [Very slick - investors get fleeced to pay PalmSource's debt!] - In fiscal 2005, the majority of our business came from the traditional PDA market. We have seen this part of our business decline over the past few years, as the growth in wireless data networks and wireless applications and services have simultaneously contributed to the maturation of this market and increased demand for converged mobile devices such as smartphones. As a result, in fiscal 2005, we saw a significant shift in our product mix towards smartphones, where our licensees reported unit volumes increased by 94% compared to fiscal 2004 and represented 27% of the total Palm OS unit volume. - Outlook for fiscal year 2006: We anticipate revenue will be negatively impacted on a year-over-year basis by factors such as Sony’s exit from the PDA market, the pre-pay of one licensee’s royalty minimum, and the expiration of certain prepaid royalties that were being amortized on a quarterly basis. - We expect that palmOne will continue to account for a substantial portion of our revenues for the foreseeable future. On May 23, 2005, we and palmOne entered into the Second Amended and Restated Software License Agreement (the “SARSLA” [affectionately known as "SARS"]). The principle changes made to the Software License Agreement were the following: • the term was extended for an additional three years and will expire December 2, 2009. [But those yearly payments were DECREASED. Massively.] • the minimum annual royalty and license commitments was extended in each of the additional three years provided that certain development milestones between the parties are met by PalmSource. • The amounts, if any, spent by palmOne on professional services will be credited towards the annual royalty and license minimum commitments on the basis of $1 credit for every $2 spent on professional services. • palmOne’s access to the Palm OS source code was extended for the three additional years for a fee of $400,000 per year. This provision gives palmOne more extensive access to the code [Golly gee whiz!], expanded rights to request bug fixes in the software platform with time frames for accepting or rejecting these bug fixes [they aren't "bugs" - they're "features"]. PalmOne can cease selling Palm Powered products at any time, which could be due to their withdrawal from the market or their use of a competing operating system. [Wow.] - During fiscal 2005, we saw several licensee specific events that will negatively impact future revenues. These events include the expiration of a license agreement without renewal, the end of the amortization for a licensee’s prepaid royalty commitment, and the prepay of minimum royalty commitments from another licensee resulting from that licensee being acquired by another company [Gee, could that possibly be AlphaSmart?]. Additionally, following the first fiscal quarter of 2006, we will see another licensee’s prepaid royalty commitment become fully amortized. Including the revenue decline from Sony and Acer, we expect the total impact of these events will negatively impact revenue for fiscal 2006 when compared to the fiscal 2005. [So, exactly how many licensees are REALLY left? Sounds like this will be a good year...] - Our product mix is shifting toward converged mobile devices, but not yet fast enough to fully offset the decline in PDAs. For example, in the three months ended May 31, 2005, smartphones were 37% of our unit shipment mix, compared to 18% in the same period a year before. In the 12 months ended May 31, 2005, smartphones were over 27% of our product mix, compared to 12% in the same period a year before. Our overall unit shipments declined from 1.1 million to 0.7 million in the three month period, and from 5.2 million to 3.6 million in the 12 month period. The shift toward smartphones has also offset a large part of the decline in revenue associated with lower PDA sales. This is because smartphones tend to sell at higher average selling prices than do PDAs, leading to higher per unit royalty revenue from our licensees. [Translation: The Treo won't save us.] - Additionally, our strategic plans focus our product development toward offering platforms for the mobile phone market, which is growing. We believe the high-end of the mobile phone market is in its early stages, and there is no guarantee that the market will grow as forecasted. - Historically, we have generated revenues from a mix of upfront license fees and per unit royalties. Recently, we have witnessed a trend in the software industry away from the payment of upfront license fees in favor of royalty fees based upon units sold. We have experienced a significant decline in our upfront license fees and, as a result, we expect our deferred revenues to continue to decline over time. - Goodwill Impairment. We perform an evaluation of the carrying value of goodwill on an annual basis or whenever an event or change in circumstances occurs which would indicate potential impairment. We anticipate that during fiscal year 2006, we will be required to test for goodwill impairment more frequently. In response to changes in industry and market conditions, we may strategically realign our resources in a manner that could result in an impairment of goodwill. We cannot assure you that future impairment tests will not result in a charge to earnings. At the end of fiscal 2005, our goodwill balance was $72.8 million or approximately 39% of total assets. [SLICK. VEEEEEEERY SLICK] - License and royalty revenues from Sony were $7.8 million and $2.0 million in fiscal years 2004, and 2005, respectively. - Interest expense. Interest expense was $0.7 million in fiscal year 2004 and $31,000 in fiscal year 2005. Interest expense increased after the distribution date due to interest on the $15.0 million 5% convertible subordinated note issued to Texas Instruments, partially offset by the decrease in interest paid to Palm as a result of the contribution to our capital by Palm of the $20.0 million note payable to Palm that bore interest at 2.48%. We expect interest expense to decrease as the $15.0 million 5% convertible subordinated note payable to Texas Instruments was repaid in June 2004. [Did the shell game confuse you? Good. And you thought PalmSource and Palm/palmOne were separate companies! Sucker.] - Gain on Asset Sale. Gain on the sale of an asset was $26.7 million in fiscal 2005, and is related to the sale of our 55% interest in Palm Trademark Holding Company LLC (“PTHC”) to palmOne for $30 million in cash. In determining the amount of net gain, PalmSource’s basis in the net assets of PTHC and direct transaction costs (primarily legal fees and valuation expenses) have been deducted from the discounted proceeds. [We will next be asking employees to empty their desks of items that can be offered at next month's MASSIVE garage sale that will be taking place at Gassée's house. Don't miss it.]
- Fred Alger Management, Inc just sold all 1.3 million shares they had (around 8% of PalmSource!) - Fidelity just dumped around 1 million shares of PalmSource (around 6% of PalmSource) [Remember TVoR's prediction about how investor panic will soon set in, driving PalmSource's stock price down, just in time for a takeout, Kiddies? It's already coming true.] - In July + August David Nagel and some other former PalmSource execs dumped 320,000 shares (2% of PalmSource). - Doreen Yochum - PalmSource's Chief Accounting Officer - just dumped 44,000 shares. And the piece de resistance: Not even ONE PalmSource insider has ever purchased a single share of PalmSource. Do they know something no one else knows? Do they have insider knowledge? ;-O The facts seem to suggest you're full of feces, Marty. People here aren't dumb enough to fall for your little game. Nice try, though.
Copyright, 2005.
The Palm Economy = Communism™ RE: Palm JUMPED THE SHARK when...PenguinPowered @ 8/20/2005 1:54:23 PM #
You can always tell how poorly skippy thinks its doing in the actual discussion by how many posts it makes in a short period with no content other than insults. So Skippy, why is it you think PalmSource would pay someone to say that if they don't get PalmLinux right they're doomed? RE: Palm JUMPED THE SHARK when...The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/20/2005 3:43:11 PM #
You can always tell how poorly skippy thinks its doing in the actual discussion by how many posts it makes in a short period with no content other than insults. So Skippy, why is it you think PalmSource would pay someone to say that if they don't get PalmLinux right they're doomed?
Looks like you're getting flustered, Marty. Time to call for backup. Where are Michael Mace [KIA], RhinoSteve [MIA], just_little_me [hiding], svrontis [shot themself in the foot], Jeff Kirvin [shot themself in the foot and then deserted] and Dianne Hackborn [deserting] when you need them? You've been getting shot up pretty badly here Mr. Fouts. Quite noble of you to give your life for PalmSource... Palminfocenter seems to be the main place people go to read about + discuss PalmOS devices. It's also the ONLY major site that isn't heavily censored, so this is where PalmSource's deficiencies have been exposed. If enough PalmSource employees can post here to counteract the facts, it might help sway current user opinion that PalmSource and PalmOS are circling the toilet bowl and about to be flushed out of existence. The sudden rash of posts to Palm sites by PalmSource employees in June + July suggests this was a co-ordinated plan to influence user opinion. [Wouldn't it be embarassing if a Really Bad Person posted an internal PalmSource email discussing how to Astroturf effectively?] The logical next step is to have "anonymous" PalmSource staff like you start Astroturfing and bashing anyone that reports The Ugly Truth About PalmSource. You have NO idea how much people are laughing at you, Marty. You may find RhinoSteve's exit strategy to be a sensible one. TVoR
The Palm Economy = Communism™ RE: Palm JUMPED THE SHARK when...The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/20/2005 5:42:04 PM #
In my opinion there have been 4 watershed design moments from Palm Inc/PalmOne/Handspring: 1. Pilot 1000 (the original) 2. Palm V (never mind the lack of RAM etc) 3. m500 line 4. Treo 600 I would say the original Pilot 1000, the TRGpro, the Handspring Treo 600 and the CLIE UX50 are the 4 most significant designs we have seen. But the "jumped the shark" reference is about a device that is the high point for the company. After the Vx, things have steadily gone downhill for Palm. And remember, Handspring made the Treo 600 - not Palm.
Poor skippy, can't even do his arithmetic right. I guess it's that old information. First off skippy, "next fall" is six weeks away, not a year. I think you meant to type "Fall '06." But even then, you haven't been paying attention. Given the current burn rate, PalmSource has enough cash to get through 2Q '07. Ummm... Doesn't PalmSource's fiscal year 2007 start in June, 2006? So that would mean their second quarter 2007 starts in SEPTEMBER, 2006. Just around the time I previously said they would be bankrupt. Nice try, Marty. > Since PalmLinux will not be ready at that point and most of From a false premise, any conclusion may be arrived at, there Skippy. Here's a simple exercise that even you should be able to do, Marty: List every PalmSource licensee that is currently still developing new hardware that runs PalmOS. What happened to AlphaSmart? Fossil? Sony? Tapwave? Garmin? Samsung? I don't think Symbol and its PalmOS 4 bricks really counts... SPIN that, Marty. > Maybe they could sell Palm the rights to the Um, no Skippy, it wasn't part of the plan. Of all your fantasies, this one about "the plan" is the one that brings me the most chuckles. I hope you're still chuckling when the fleeced PalmSource stockholders figure out what happenened and send their lawyers in for retribution. > Looks like the bogus Palm "split" is about to come to an end Well, yeah, except that reality intrudes. You need to catch up on your news releases there Skippy. New licensees have been announced, along with new revenue sources. Also, your math on the burn rate is wrong by 3 quarters. (Hint: you don't seem to be taking CMS into account.) Love how you managed to pleuralize LG. Did PalmSource seell a licence to both L and G? Or are you starting to see double from the beating you've taken since showing up here? I'll say it again: PalmSource runs out of money "sometime next Fall" (i.e. September - November, 2006, just to make it simple for you.) "Astroturfing" is a phrase coined to describe the use of paid employees to create fake grassroots support for a thing or a company. It's a practice particularly prevalent in the oil, tobacco, and pharmaceutical industries, but it's also been used extensively in politics (USA Next), and technology (Microsoft US antitrust trial). I'm shocked you've never heard of the term. Adam, do you REALLY believe Marty is that naive? ;-O Licensees? Plural? I only see LG, and until they produce actual hardware, the revenue from them has got to be minimal. I can't imagine that CMS is so vastly profitable that they'll have spare tens of millions to throw at PSRC either. In Marty's World, PalmSource announces a new licensee every week and these licensees all start shipping devices within 2 months (as opposed to the two YEARS it will take to see a smartphone from LG). > Licensees? Plural? I only see LG, and until they produce My bad. Licensee. But one of the things Skippy seems to have missed is that Palm renewed its license and there is revenue slated before the end of next year. My bad? Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha. Ha. Homeboy, you slipped up and forgot PalmSource has not yet announced its shocking new licensee. Ooops! Their only new sources of revenue might be if they sell some of Gassée's greasy hair. > I can't imagine that CMS is so vastly profitable that they'll When thinking in terms of b |
Sticking out aerials are bad design, making them rounded doesn't help. Make the damn thing internal, there is plenty of space in there.
If Nokia could do it during the last century, you should be able to do it in this century.
Fish