 |
    Comments on: Palm Comments Positively on PalmSource Acquisition
Detailed Comment View (74 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: Big Surprise!
Actually, I think this is just what the doctor ordered for the platform. PalmSource needed to get away from that "special" relationship they had with PalmOne.
-- http://www.arpx.net/article.php/top_10_palmos_applications - my top 10 palm apps 
 Fantastic News :)Dr Opinion @ 9/9/2005 7:35:48 PM #
This massive premium can only be justified if: (1) the palm economy is nurtured and grown and continues to provide plenty of revenue for ACCESS and... (2) PalmLinux is going to be really good -- and possibly ship early. Of course it's good news for Palm. :) Apparently geeko-the-shill was wrong all along: Cobalt, Garnet, and the PalmLinux opportunity are great assets, and worth a lot of cash. No matter how he squirms, Cobalt, Garnet and the future PalmLinux have just been acquired for *cash*, and that definitively puts a price on them. This is definitely a sucky day to be a m$ shill! :) RE: Fantastic News :)
Since Access is a japanese company, I couldn't imagine what they'll do with the Palm OS.... RE: Fantastic News :)AdamaDBrown @ 9/9/2005 11:52:57 PM #
I'm afraid the stock analysts don't neccessarily agree with you. Charles Wolf, one of the long-term analysts covering Palm, PSRC, formerly Handspring, etc. expressed shock at the selling price, saying that it was unreasonably high. I'm no stock analyst, but I do have some experience in the market, and I tend to agree. For an unprofitable company with the slim prospects PalmSource has, paying 83% above market cap is ridiculous. 25% over market cap, maybe even 40% I could see, since the company's pre-buyout stock value was close to its total monetary reserves, but 83% is ludicrous. As someone said earlier, either Access has the dumbest people in the world, or the smartest people in the world. I'm reserving judgement. RE: Fantastic News :)
The true value of a company can only be accurately determined twice - when it is bought and when it is sold. The rest is simply noise. It doesn't matter what the WallStreet analysts or you think about the deal. The bottom line is that someone is willing to pay $18.5 a share for Palmsource in CASH, and that's the fact. Did Access overpay for Palmsource? Nobody knows for sure. Only time will tell. I, for one, think Palmsource can be worth much more than $325 million a couple years down the road. Case in point: there are plenty of people out there who think a car costing $200K is outrageous, but last time I checked plenty of Ferraris are still being sold. RE: Fantastic News :)Dr Opinion @ 9/10/2005 11:05:57 AM #
> "Charles Wolf, one of the long-term analysts covering Palm, PSRC, formerly Handspring, etc. expressed shock..."
RE: Fantastic News :)Timothy Rapson @ 9/11/2005 8:55:42 AM #
Very concisely put and in the most clear context. If Access pays $320 million for PalmSource there can be no doubt that $320 million is what it is worth today. It is going to be a wild watch to see where the value goes from her. Real wild. RE: Fantastic News :)
>If Access pays $320 million for PalmSource there can be no doubt that $320 million is what it is worth today. This means nothing. TWX thought AOL was worth a lot too a few years ago and shareholders have been paying dearly for that decision ever since. RE: Fantastic News :)
Also look at Ford buying Jaguar & Land Rover... Or, even better, BMW buying Rover. I highly doubt they worth will increase down the road, especially seeing as how PalmSource hasn't shipped any new PRODUCT (ie a new OS) since 2002. SHIPPED, I said, as in being loaded on devices currently for sale at retail. RE: Fantastic News :)
He probably had a BUY rating on PSRC when it was trading at $40. Now he questions the validity of the sell @ $17.50! Sounds about like a well groomed stock pundit. I'm still amazed that anyone anywhere at anytime listens to anything these "analysts" say. The only thing they can predict accurately is what has already happened. A dartboard, 7 darts and the WSJ stock quotes page will do just as well as the analysts. "Prediction is difficult, especially about the future". RE: Fantastic News :)stonemirror @ 9/12/2005 1:50:20 AM #
I'm afraid the stock analysts don't neccessarily agree with you.
I'm afraid the stock analysts don't even agree with each other. Sam Saunders, of Fulcrum Global Partners, says, "[I]f you look at the research-and-development assets on the balance sheet, we think the price of $18.50 a share is warranted." http://www.smartmoney.com/onedaywonder/index.cfm?story=20050909 And, of course, stock analysts are always right. That's why they've underestimated our earnings pretty much every single time, hm?
I'm in doubt
While the acquisition may be good, I have doubts that innovation of the Palm OS Platform might be stiffled given that someone else now owns the Palm OS Platform. I am also deeply concerned what this means to the Palm OS Economy as a whole. I am wondering if I am going to still see traditional Handhelds to this day. I am, without a doubt, a man of many concerns right now. More questions and/or concerns will be given as I can think of. RE: I'm in doubtThe_Voice_of_Reason @ 9/10/2005 7:17:57 AM #
Thanks for sharing, e-tellurian.
------------------------ 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 How PalmSource is REALLY doing: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8026#110958
PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?VampireLestat @ 9/10/2005 12:06:38 AM #
How come no one is insisting that we get a clear answer from Palm or Access regarding the future of PoL on a HANDHELD?! Enough already, give us a damn clear answer or else we need to move on to WM. RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?The_Voice_of_Reason @ 9/10/2005 12:12:43 AM #
Don't be silly. If PalmLinux works for smartphones it will be more than good enough for traditional handhelds. It's a nonissue. Only a subset of the proposed PalmLinux features would be needed to make a superb traditional PDA OS.
The Palm eCONomy = Communism The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038 How PalmSource is REALLY doing: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8026#110958 RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?AdamaDBrown @ 9/10/2005 2:37:06 AM #
I don't think it is a non-issue. There's lots of things that would be needed for handhelds that wouldn't be needed if they're talking about PalmOS as a mobile phone OS. Touchscreen support, for instance. We do need a clear and decisive answer with regard to the future of the platform. RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?
In this age of convergence I fail to see what a handheld can have that a smartphone can't. Comparing between handhelds and smartphones there are smartphones which have: - Touchscreen support: Treo 650, Sony Ericsson p910i - Wi-fi: Nokia 9500 - Bluetooth: All of the above and now even hard disks. Therefore I agree that it's a non-issue. If PalmLinux is a good OS then it'll take account of the features offered on the device it's running on - be it smartphone or handheld, just as Windows XP takes account of whether a PC has wi-fi, bluetooth, more than one processor, etc. RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?The_Voice_of_Reason @ 9/10/2005 7:03:36 AM #
I don't think it is a non-issue. There's lots of things that would be needed for handhelds that wouldn't be needed if they're talking about PalmOS as a mobile phone OS. Touchscreen support, for instance. We do need a clear and decisive answer with regard to the future of the platform. I've been told that the traditional PDA functionality of PalmOS 6 (Cobalt) will be replicated in PalmLinux. In other words: PalmLinux will do everything (and a LOT more) on a traditional PDA that PalmOS 5 (Garnet) currently does. Again, this is a NONISSUE.
The Palm eCONomy = Communism The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038 How PalmSource is REALLY doing: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8026#110958 RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?
The way I read the original question, it's not about the quality of the OS. It's about the availability of the hardware. It doesn't matter how good the next iteration of PalmOS is if those of us who don't want smartphones can't buy a traditional handheld. If the market for PDAs is stagnant and the handheld companies are focusing on smartphones, it's a legitimate question. Will we have a Palm based option, or will those of us who are "anti-palmphone" going to have to switch to WM for our PDA?
RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?
"I fail to see what a handheld can have that a smartphone can't." Obviously a smartphone can always have the same features as the handheld. The handheld can have: No matter how good the phone component is, it will never be free, zero-weight, zero-power. Some users want the phone bult-in; some don't. RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?
"Will we have a [handheld]Palm based option" I don't think you have to fear losing handheld devices. They are currently getting very little media buzz, but handhelds are still outselling smart phones and will probably continue for a while. It will always be easier to make a handheld than a smartphone. (Just throwaway the phone half of a smartphone) Handhelds are cheaper and Palm needs a low-end device to sell. No fear--handhelds will not disappear! RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?
JarJar said Obviously a smartphone can always have the same features as the handheld. The handheld can have... Yes, these are obvious; what I was trying to say is what features does a handheld have which a smartphone OS can't cater for. The question of price, weight, size and battery life are all variables common to both handhelds and smartphones. To use an analogy, we can compare planes and trucks. Both have tyres so both have the potential to drive along roads - obviously you can't drive around Manhattan in a 747 but you could drive a small Cessna around the Nevada desert (It's not sensible nor legal but it's possible). They can both carry freight - big trucks carry more freight than small Cessna planes. The fundamental feature which sets them apart is the ability of the plane to fly. Something no truck can do. There's no feature a handheld posesses which a smartphone can't, therefore a smartphone OS on a handheld will be capable of handling everything that can be done on a handheld. Like the plane example, I'm not suggesting it's necessarily the best solution but it's a possible solution. In answer to whether they'll be handhelds around, the obvious answer is that they'll be around for as long as it remains a profitable enterprise to sell them. The big debate now is whether it's profitable to sell a Palm OS handheld. An increasing number of companies have found it to be an unprofitable enterprise during the previous two years. RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?PenguinPowered @ 9/10/2005 4:57:30 PM #
> I don't think it is a non-issue. There's lots of things that > would be needed for handhelds that wouldn't be needed if > they're talking about PalmOS as a mobile phone OS. > Touchscreen support, for instance. I was under the impression that the Treo 650 has a touchscreen. I don't think that's a feature unique to non-phone handhelds. > We do need a clear and decisive answer with regard to the If my aging memory serves me correctly, PalmSource announced at the developer's conference that PalmLinux was for _mobile devices_, a class which, to them, includes handhelds with or without phone modules. I can't speak for management, but as a technologist, I see the cellphone as having an overlapping feature set with the handheld. The trick, to an OS developer, is modularity. You need to be able to easily configure the software so that the right set of features for the device gets included in the build for that device. It's something Linux is well adapted to.
RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?AdamaDBrown @ 9/10/2005 10:00:59 PM #
JarJar said: I don't think you have to fear losing handheld devices. They are currently getting very little media buzz, but handhelds are still outselling smart phones and will probably continue for a while. Bingo! Handhelds are still going strong, and are going even stronger if you include smartphones: which, contrary to the popular spin, are a subdivision of handhelds, NOT of cell phones. Just look at the serious computing capability of a cell phone, a smartphone, and a handheld. The smartphone and the handheld have far more in common than the simple bond of both being capable of voice communication. This is also why it's a mistake for anybody to abandon the handheld market in favor of smartphones or so-called "feature phones." They may think that they're jumping on the next big thing, but what they're really doing is cutting themselves off from a big chunk of the market. A good mobile OS can run both handhelds and smartphones, but a smartphone OS is only good for one thing. Penguin said: The T650 does, but the WM Smartphones don't, the Symbian Series 60 models don't, the Blackberries don't, and all those Linux handsets that are bragged about don't. If you're primarily intending it as a mobile phone platform, there's no need for a touchscreen. THAT is why we need a clear and concise statement about the future of the platform. PalmSource announced at the developer's conference that PalmLinux was for _mobile devices Which matters not at all if the new bosses decide they want to change things. Any statements up until this point are effectively useless, because none of them reflect the attitude and interests of Access. RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?Timothy Rapson @ 9/11/2005 9:17:33 AM #
Yep, the touchscreen is a normally left out of a phone rather than put in. Phones are normally narrower and thicker than their comparable PDAs, which are wider and flatter. Phones normally have smaller screens and more buttons than PDAs. Phones are marketed far differently than PDAs. I don't have or need a cell phone, so the $200 two year contract rebate is useless to me. I just want to buy the feature set I want cash. While none of these are absolute OS issues and so are not 100% crucial to the issue of Access/PalmOS, they do relate in the current market. They may not determine how successful this new merger is in the overall market, but they may very well determine whether the merger benefits me. RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?PenguinPowered @ 9/11/2005 1:38:17 PM #
> The T650 does, but the WM Smartphones don't, the Symbian > Series 60 models don't, the Blackberries don't, and all those > Linux handsets that are bragged about don't. ARM Linux has touchscreen support for the processors used in phones and PDAs. That's not going away. PalmOS already has support for touchscreens. That's not going to bit rot. > If you're primarily intending it as a mobile phone platform, The high end mobile phone already has a touchscreen. Trends in consumer electronics are towards adopting features, not away from them. > THAT is why we need a clear and concise statement about the Well, you may desire such a statement, as do I, but touchscreens aren't a good example of why. They're here. They're supported. They're not going away.
RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?stonemirror @ 9/11/2005 8:46:49 PM #
Okay, I can definitely commit to our supporting touchscreens in "Palm OS for Linux". That wasn't hard. Everybody happy now? Anybody going to shoot anybody...?Treat Williams as "John Finnegan" in Deep Rising Love, Lefty (the Great and Terrible) RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?
< Gosh VR, you're softening a bit lately! "Might" & PL in the same sentence. I'm in shock! :-) RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?stonemirror @ 9/12/2005 1:12:39 AM #
When I was at Apple, folks there would say that the corporate motto should be "Going out of business since 1984". I always thought it should have been "Not what it used to be since 1991". I note that none of this has inhibited the stock from rising substantially. Palm, why have you forsaken us?The_Voice_of_Reason @ 9/12/2005 2:15:32 AM #
Okay, I can definitely commit to our supporting touchscreens in "Palm OS for Linux". That wasn't hard. Everybody happy now? Did you clear that statement with your new masters at Access, Schlesinger-San? Or is your name Ronin? "Either you're part of the problem or you're part of the solution or you're just part of the landscape."
For now I'll give Access the benefit of the doubt, Pat. If they finish decontaminating PalmSource by expunging most of the remaining Holy Be Engineers, hire some REAL programmers and license a few core apps, we just might see PalmLinux. In 2007... I'm still waiting for Palm to build your brilliant Treo design, Pat. Until someone comes up with something like this, I'll be sticking with my T608. http://churchoflivingfaith.com/images/treo800big.jpg By the way, is this one supposed to represent Palm/PalmSource after the "pruning" (downsizing)? http://churchoflivingfaith.com/images/palm2survival.JPG And Geeko, as much as I have mocked CrApple and Svengali Steve over the years, there's no disputing that some of the brightest minds in the business have worked there at some point in their careers. Michael Mace is one notable exception, but who's counting? TVoR
The Palm eCONomy = Communism The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038 NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823 RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?AdamaDBrown @ 9/12/2005 3:48:18 AM #
The high end mobile phone already has a touchscreen. Trends in consumer electronics are towards adopting features, not away from them. Tell that to the Apple Newton users. In any event, high-end smartphones can afford to have touchscreens, since they're expensive. If Access were stupid enough to try and push into the mid-range and low-end market of mobile phones, touchscreens would be a hinderence. Fortunately, they don't seem to be doing that, at least not yet. RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?stonemirror @ 9/12/2005 11:06:38 AM #
Did you clear that statement with your new masters at Access, Schlesinger-San? Or is your name Ronin? No need to clear it. I'm the one managing this project, as I've mentioned. And my name is 恐ろしき大鏡石. "Either you're part of the problem or you're part of the solution or you're just part of the landscape." If you aren't part of the parade, you're part of the pavement. No need to worry about feet in your mouth, yours seems to have been firmly wedged there for some time now... Hey, how come Dianne and Marty get to resign and I don't? That "little bird" seems to have shat in your ear, and you thought it was telling you something, ne...? Love, Lefty (the Great and Terrible) ɂ͐EThe_Voice_of_Reason @ 9/12/2005 4:16:18 PM #
No need to clear it. I'm the one managing this project, as I've mentioned. And my name is 낵勾. Really? Earlier you said it was fBN^[. In reality it's just . Say hello to Combee, for me Sweetie. "Either you're part of the problem or you're part of the solution or you're just part of the landscape." If you aren't part of the parade, you're part of the pavement. No need to worry about feet in your mouth, yours seems to have been firmly wedged there for some time now... My, my, my... Hey, how come Dianne and Marty get to resign and I don't? That "little bird" seems to have shat in your ear, and you thought it was telling you something, ne...? Come back to this thread in January, 2006 and tell us where DK is working. Here's a little tip that has served me well: Shiraz = sodium pentathal for the femme. By the way, I never said anything about Marty's employment future. And that little bird sings the sweetest dulcet tunes. If only you had a clue, David...
The Palm eCONomy = Communism The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038 NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823 RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?stonemirror @ 9/12/2005 6:06:38 PM #
And my name is 낵勾. Really? Earlier you said it was fBN^[. Geeze, get a decent browser, wouldja? That's deplorable. Join the rest of us in the 21st century. You're going to have a lot more trouble utterly misunderstanding what's going on if you can't manage a few kana. Love, Lefty (the Great and Terrible) RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?The_Voice_of_Reason @ 9/12/2005 6:49:40 PM #
View -> Encoding -> Japanese Take care. The Palm eCONomy = Communism The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038 NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823 RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?stonemirror @ 9/12/2005 7:14:00 PM #
Oh. Shift-JIS. You poor, benighted soul. fBN^[ My title is Director, not my name. Sorry, you're not my type. 肢̂HƂ܂ȗݕȂ́B\Chiaki Kuriyama as "Gogo Yubari" in Kill Bill, vol. 1 Love, Lefty (the Great and Terrible) RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?The_Voice_of_Reason @ 9/12/2005 7:35:19 PM #
fBN^[ My title is Director, not my name. Sorry, you're not my type.
No. Another inappropriate joke which I once foolishly made with Ms. Hackborn. I think she now feels I'm a boor, but in reality, some of my best friends are... well - not really. Maybe she IS right after all... My apologies if any offence was taken. Let's stick to dissecting PalmOS, David. I'm done with this and honestly wish you the best of luck getting a good product to market in a timely manner. Take care. TVoR The Palm eCONomy = Communism The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038 NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823 RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?stonemirror @ 9/12/2005 8:08:29 PM #
My apologies if any offence was taken. Nope: you'll have to work a lot hard than that to offend me. Heck, you'll have to work harder than this to amuse me. Love, Lefty (the Great and Terrible) RE: PoL for phones, OK, but what about handhelds?The_Voice_of_Reason @ 9/12/2005 8:49:42 PM #
Nope: you'll have to work a lot hard than that to offend me.
Heck, you'll have to work harder than this to amuse me. ;-O I'm done here for now. Take care. TVoR The Palm eCONomy = Communism The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038 NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823
STRONG companies don't get acquired
The big eat the small and the fast eat the slow and the strong eat the weak. RE: STRONG companies don't get acquiredPenguinPowered @ 9/11/2005 9:42:55 PM #
and in the end, the worms eat them all. . .
RE: STRONG companies don't get acquired
but the company lives on when it hires the right replacements for those who bite the dust! ;-) RE: STRONG companies don't get acquiredPenguinPowered @ 9/11/2005 10:42:50 PM #
All I know is that I'm still eating well. ;)
RE: STRONG companies don't get acquiredThe_Voice_of_Reason @ 9/11/2005 11:22:40 PM #
and in the end, the worms eat them all. . . If that's your philosophy Marty, why even bother trying at all? The Palm eCONomy = Communism The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038 NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823 RE: STRONG companies don't get acquiredjust_little_me @ 9/11/2005 11:32:07 PM #
Sounds more like an admission of fact than a philosophy...
RE: STRONG companies don't get acquiredThe_Voice_of_Reason @ 9/12/2005 12:04:39 AM #
Get back to work, JLM. Otherwise no bananas for 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 NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823 RE: STRONG companies don't get acquiredjust_little_me @ 9/12/2005 12:12:31 AM #
At least I have a nicely paying job to go back to d1ck-wad... God to TVoR: No brains for you!
RE: STRONG companies don't get acquiredPenguinPowered @ 9/12/2005 12:16:16 AM #
> and in the end, the worms eat them all. . . > If that's your philosophy Marty, why even bother trying at It's not a philosophy, Skippy, it's a comment on how ecology works. The 'food chain' is a cycle, not an end to end thing. The 'survival of the fittest' metaphor doesn't work in ecology, so why try to bring it into business?
Pothead Philosophy 101The_Voice_of_Reason @ 9/12/2005 1:36:43 AM #
At least I have a nicely paying job to go back to d1ck-wad... Is it that time of the month again JLM? I'll see you at the drive-through tomorrow. And yes, I would like fries with that. >>>> and in the end, the worms eat them all. . . > If that's your philosophy Marty, why even bother trying at It's not a philosophy, Skippy, it's a comment on how ecology works. The 'food chain' is a cycle, not an end to end thing. The 'survival of the fittest' metaphor doesn't work in ecology, so why try to bring it into business? That was deep, Marty. Really deep. Now since everything is going to get recycled anyway, why even bother trying to achieve anything at all? Were you a pothead in the 60's, Marty? I'll bet you were (and you INHALED!). TVoR. Whoooooooah. Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude.
The Palm eCONomy = Communism The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038 NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823 Lunkhead Hypocrisy 101stonemirror @ 9/12/2005 2:08:31 AM #
Nice to see that your commitment to "courtesy" is undiminished... Love, Lefty (the Great and Terrible) RE: STRONG companies don't get acquiredPenguinPowered @ 9/12/2005 2:35:31 AM #
> That was deep, Marty. You find introductory high school biology deep, Skippy? Hmm.... that sure explains a lot. > Really deep. Now since everything is going to get recycled Why am I not surprised you've never figured out an answer to that question? > Were you a pothead in the 60's, Marty? I'll bet you were (and Poor Skippy, wrong again. Much to my regret, I missed out on all of the recreational pharmaceuticals of the 60s and 70s. But I _did_ inhale.
RE: STRONG companies don't get acquiredAdamaDBrown @ 9/12/2005 3:51:24 AM #
It's not quite accurate to say that strong companies don't get acquired. It's more accurate to say that to acquire a strong company, one must be a much stronger company. For instance, HP isn't going to get acquired, unless it's by IBM, and Microsoft isn't going to be acquired except by Halliburton. RE: STRONG companies don't get acquiredThe_Voice_of_Reason @ 9/12/2005 4:36:02 AM #
Nice to see that your commitment to "courtesy" is undiminished...
The Palm eCONomy = Communism The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038 NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823 Big Food Chain of LifeSeldomVisitor @ 9/12/2005 6:51:30 AM #
Alas - THE song I was looking for I couldn't Google - lyrics like: == We're all part of the Big Food Chain, the big But these'll do! -- http://www.songsforteaching.com/kathleencarroll/foodchain.htm Food Chain ReduxSeldomVisitor @ 9/12/2005 7:04:52 AM #
My apologies to singer Mike Cross - those lyrics above are somewhat incorrect. Here's a link that has the actual ones down a-ways on the page: -- http://www.nanfa.org/archive/nanfa/nanfamay02/0151.html Maybe a search on Mike Cross and "Food Chain" would turn up a playable version... Food Chain DenoumentSeldomVisitor @ 9/12/2005 7:11:11 AM #
How about that - Mike Cross' own web site has the song (RAM format - Realplayer? Unplayable by me but maybe by you): The site: -- http://www.mikecross.com/discs.asp?id=1 The song: PalmSource Philosophy 101The_Voice_of_Reason @ 9/12/2005 8:18:13 AM #
"If you're killed in the matrix, you die here?"
The Palm eCONomy = Communism The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038 NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823 RE: STRONG companies don't get acquired
Inclination towards courtesy is inversely proportional to the number of insulting posts received from imbeciles like JLM ("d1ck-wad...") and snivelling sycophants like Beersy. Or to put it another way, if you're not being called an imbecile or snivelling sycophant by TVoR, you probably are one.
RE: STRONG companies don't get acquiredstonemirror @ 9/12/2005 10:27:47 AM #
Inclination towards courtesy is inversely proportional to the number of insulting posts... No doubt you've been receiving insulting responses for so long and from so many that you've actually forgotten the meaning of the word, something like the problem Surur seems to have with the notion of processes and the difference between "single" and "multiple"... As far as "magic" goes, I doubt you understand a single thing about it, so let's leave spirituality out of the discussion... T'ain't pertinent to anything here anyway, and if you think you can cow me by bringing it up, you for sure don't know me very well. Love, Lefty (the Great and Terrible) RE: STRONG companies don't get acquiredThe_Voice_of_Reason @ 9/12/2005 4:54:53 PM #
Or to put it another way, if you're not being called an imbecile or snivelling sycophant by TVoR, you probably are one. Thanks for yet another non sequitur, Beersy. Thanks for sharing. The Palm eCONomy = Communism The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038 NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823 My Magick ManThe_Voice_of_Reason @ 9/12/2005 4:57:20 PM #
As far as "magic" goes, I doubt you understand a single thing about it, so let's leave spirituality out of the discussion... T'ain't pertinent to anything here anyway, and if you think you can cow me by bringing it up, you for sure don't know me very well. Would you like to join our Crowley Club and see, David? Meets last Friday of the month in The City. I'm not looking at you, David, I'm looking through you. Does this frighten you? Good.
The Palm eCONomy = Communism The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038 NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823 RE: STRONG companies don't get acquiredstonemirror @ 9/12/2005 6:11:22 PM #
...join our Crowley Club... You have a "Crowley Club"...? That's so cuuuuuuuuuuute! Do you also engage in his coprophilic pursuits? In any case, I'll pass, thanks. Love, Lefty (the Great and Terrible) RE: STRONG companies don't get acquiredstonemirror @ 9/12/2005 7:24:30 PM #
I wonder whether you have the slightest sense of how amusing it is to see you reduced to this sort of thing. "Yo' momma so fat she got other little mommas in orbit 'round her!" Perhaps you've been involving yourself in Crowley's other hobby, providing a home for needy STDs. He got his taken care of before it developed into paresis, but possibly you've not been quite as fortunate... Love, Lefty (the Great and Terrible) RE: WEALTHY companies buy SMALLER companies for their growthDr Opinion @ 9/12/2005 8:26:56 PM #
Geeko, you are very ignorant. Anyone with the slightest knowledge of corporate development understands that large companies tend to have slower growth, and they buy small companies with great growth prospects specifically to increase their own growth. Critical to that story is "not breaking the smaller company's growth prospects". Large companies with lots of cash do not buy failed companies. That would be called "destroying shareholder value". Shareholders don't like that sort of thing. Managers get fired. Etc. For some strange reason, I feel the need to quote BA Baracus: "Shut up fool, you ain't no fish!" It's not 100% relevant, but you get the gist. :)
Magickal Mystery MachineThe_Voice_of_Reason @ 9/13/2005 10:44:18 PM #
I wonder whether you have the slightest sense of how amusing it is to see you reduced to this sort of thing.
"Yo' momma so fat she got other little mommas in orbit 'round her!" Perhaps you've been involving yourself in Crowley's other hobby, providing a home for needy STDs. He got his taken care of before it developed into paresis, but possibly you've not been quite as fortunate... Do you REALLY think I would resort to lowbrow retorts out of desperation? Don't delude yourself, David. And don't knock tabes dorsalis until you've tried it.
The Palm eCONomy = Communism The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038 NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823
Maybe PALM will buy PalmOS from Access?
Maybe that explains the 83% premium? Rather than pay licensing fees and have no control over the OS, maybe PALM buys the entire PalmOS from Access for ~$100M. Then Access continues to work on all the other garbage vis a vis China. Just a theory. RE: Maybe PALM will buy PalmOS from Access?
Gekko. That's hurtin'. Palm aint absorbing them ... it's over. Just like G1 & real RAM. Lay down on the couch, breath deeply, no just let it go ... think positive thots now such as the "clipboard limit" & G2 now reside far far away, in Tokyo. :-) No longer will we say ... "Check out my new Palm". From now on it will be "Check out my new Palm Inc brand PDA running what was once Palm OS, but now known as Access OS, which is really a GUI running on top of Linux, that can run Palm legacy apps written according to Palm's guidelines ... the guidelines that they don't even keep with their own PIM apps". That aughta be one serious chick magnet! Palm & PSRC worked this $30M name sell a few months ago, knowing that this deal was going to go down. They insiders knew that would be the last insider deal between the two before PSRC was AXecessed. RE: Maybe PALM will buy PalmOS from Access?The_Voice_of_Reason @ 9/12/2005 5:16:33 PM #
Gekko. That's hurtin'. Palm aint absorbing them ... it's over. Just like G1 & real RAM. Lay down on the couch, breath deeply, no just let it go ... think positive thots now such as the "clipboard limit" & G2 now reside far far away, in Tokyo. :-)
No longer will we say ... "Check out my new Palm". From now on it will be "Check out my new Palm Inc brand PDA running what was once Palm OS, but now known as Access OS, which is really a GUI running on top of Linux, that can run Palm legacy apps written according to Palm's guidelines ... the guidelines that they don't even keep with their own PIM apps". That aughta be one serious chick magnet! Palm & PSRC worked this $30M name sell a few months ago, knowing that this deal was going to go down. They insiders knew that would be the last insider deal between the two before PSRC was AXecessed. Pat Horne: I rebuke you!
The Palm eCONomy = Communism The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038 NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823
If HE'S the SVP of Engineering...SeldomVisitor @ 9/13/2005 5:37:57 PM #
...then what's Celeste Baransky?
(pardon possible spelling errors there) And what happens to that cool Golden Parachute she just got? Inquiring minds wanna know!
But PALM also said it doesn't make senseSeldomVisitor @ 9/20/2005 9:33:26 AM #
== "There was a point beyond which we didn't think == it made sense," Palm CEO Ed Colligan wrote in an == e-mail to Palm employees obtained by BusinessWeek... -- http://yahoo.businessweek.com/technology/content/sep2005/tc20050920_6583_tc081.htm What an interesting state of affairs! RE: But PALM also said it doesn't make sense
Really interesting. So the real reason for the 83% premium wasnt the goodness of Access's heart, but a bidding war, and Palm, who knows POS best, did not think POS was worth $300 million. On the other hand Access did. I wonder who the other European handset companies were. Could it have been Nokia?
Surur
Only the first 40 comments are displayed with the article.
|
Special Deals
Shop at Amazon and help support PalmInfocenter
|
||||
PalmInfocenter.com is not affiliated with or endorsed by Palm Inc, Access or PalmSource in any way.
Any use of the word Palm is for discussion purposes and is a registered trademark of Palm Inc.
Unauthorized reproduction of content is strictly forbidden.
© MobileInfocenter.com, all rights reserved.
Blow smoke up my azz.
See you at the Windows Mobile Treo party!!!!!!!!!