MobileInfocenter

Comments on: Palm Announces Next-Generation Treo for Europe

New Palm Inc Logo ~ Click for largerPalm today announced it has forged a new relationship with Vodafone targeted at expanding the adoption of wireless push email in Europe. Palm has officially announced that a new Windows Mobile powered 3G/UTMS Treo will debut on Vodafone in Europe before the end of the year. However, Palm has not released any other specs or pictures at this time.
Return to Story - Permalink

Article Comments

 (90 comments)

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

Start a new Comment Down

HP hw6915, SE M600, Nokia E61, Samsung SGH i320, Motorola Q, BenQ

Surur @ 7/13/2006 1:24:36 PM # Q
P51, FSC Loox T830, Blackberry 7130g, SE P990, etc etc...

That's just some of the devices awaiting this Treo in Europe.

Surur

They said I only argued for the sake of arguing, but after an hour I convinced them they were wrong...
Hey!! I made associate writer at PDA247. Come see my nattering over there!!
http;//www.clieuk.co.uk/wm.shtml

RE: HP hw6915, SE M600, Nokia E61, Samsung SGH i320, Motorola Q,
cervezas @ 7/13/2006 1:35:48 PM # Q
P51, FSC Loox T830, Blackberry 7130g, SE P990, etc etc...

To say nothing of the Nokia 9000 series, which from my understanding sell very well in Europe.

On the other hand, you've got roughly triple the smartphone penetration in Europe that we have here in the US. There's room for more models without saturating the market. It'll be interesting to see how it goes for Palm.

The burning question, now that Treo #3 has gone from promise to rumor to official announcement, is what's Treo #4 going to be like. I'm told that it's *not* going to be Lowrider this year--which makes sense to me: Lowrider is for all intents and purposes here in the form of the Treo 650. It's supposed to be Palm OS, though, and presumably it's going to be for GSM networks since the 700p is fresh. But unless Palm has figured out a way to make a Garnet phone comply with the UMTS standard you have to wonder what the selling point of another EDGE-radio Treo will be.

* iTunes integration?
* iQue-style GPS navigation?
* Integrated screen whine reduction software? ;-)

I'd love to see Palm open up a GPS API, and it shouldn't be too hard or costly, given the fact that there's already a GPS receiver installed in the 650 to make it E911 compliant. But so far it doesn't seem like the operators (excluding Sprint/Nextel) are very convinced they can make money off of location-based services.

David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: HP hw6915, SE M600, Nokia E61, Samsung SGH i320, Motorola Q, BenQ
Surur @ 7/13/2006 2:44:58 PM # Q

If there is another Treo, Im sure it will be the Lowrider, and the selling point will be the price.

Surur

They said I only argued for the sake of arguing, but after an hour I convinced them they were wrong...
Hey!! I made associate writer at PDA247. Come see my nattering over there!!
http;//www.clieuk.co.uk/wm.shtml

RE: HP hw6915, SE M600, Nokia E61, Samsung SGH i320, Motorola Q,
rened @ 7/13/2006 3:02:57 PM # Q
>I'd love to see Palm open up a GPS API, and it shouldn't be too
>hard or costly, given the fact that there's already a GPS receiver
>installed in the 650 to make it E911 compliant.

As far as i know, E911 compliance does not imply a gps receiver. Localisation by means of gps-signals will do.

It's pitty the new treo is not a PalmOs machine, but WM without an antenna will definitly sell...


rened

RE: HP hw6915, SE M600, Nokia E61, Samsung SGH i320, Motorola Q,
PenguinPowered @ 7/13/2006 3:16:46 PM # Q
given the fact that there's already a GPS receiver installed in the 650 to make it E911 compliant.

Are you sure? The E911 standard does not require a GPS and at least one US carrier is complying using triangulation techniques rather than a GPS.

May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: HP hw6915, SE M600, Nokia E61, Samsung SGH i320, Motorola Q,
fishtastic @ 7/13/2006 3:33:27 PM # Q
Now Palm say it with me

240x240 bad
320x240 good

Don't continue to mis-read the winmob market just because HP have too.....

RE: HP hw6915, SE M600, Nokia E61, Samsung SGH i320, Motorola Q,
cervezas @ 7/13/2006 4:12:54 PM # Q
As far as i know, E911 compliance does not imply a gps receiver.

Turns out you're right. I knew it is was requirement for Sprint and Verizon (presumably any CDMA network) but apparently triangulating position from network towers is good enough to satisfy the government on GSM networks. Not sure why that is, but you learn something new every day.

Frankly even if you can only expose tower triangulation location data (accurate to within ~150-300m) it would still be useful for some kinds of location based applications. Not useful enough to be an important selling point for a GSM Treo, unfortunately.

David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: HP hw6915, SE M600, Nokia E61, Samsung SGH i320, Motorola Q,
cervezas @ 7/13/2006 5:19:44 PM # Q
surer wrote:
If there is another Treo, Im sure it will be the Lowrider

Just reviewed my notes and correspondence to make sure my memory was correct. You may be right that the 4th Treo will be aiming at a lower price point.

It's interesting because from what I hear Palm doesn't seem terribly worried about the competition. I got this comment in April from my contact who talks regularly with Palm management:

Looking at the competition roadmap Palm is feeling pretty confident that they can keep the upper hand without rushing new products out the door.

What he is referring to that Palm decided not to rush out the door this year was the Treo with the significantly new form factor. When we spoke in April he said Palm expected to deliver that in 2007.

Still, I'm sure they recognize that cracking the European market will be a challenge with uncertain results, even with Microsoft's massive marketing engine thrumming away under the hood this time.



David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: HP hw6915, SE M600, Nokia E61, Samsung SGH i320, Motorola Q,
fierywater @ 7/13/2006 5:48:07 PM # Q
Turns out you're right. I knew it is was requirement for Sprint and Verizon (presumably any CDMA network) but apparently triangulating position from network towers is good enough to satisfy the government on GSM networks. Not sure why that is, but you learn something new every day.

So that would mean that the CDMA Treo models must have a built-in GPS receiver, correct? I know Palm just released new CDMA models, but I wouldn't be surprised to see access to the GPS added in a future model.

That said, it probably wouldn't be too hard for Palm to add a GPS to a GSM Treo, would it? I understand that on the CDMA Treo it may be integrated with the chipset, but it still couldn't be that difficult (or costly) to add. It'd almost justify the price points Palm has been aiming for.

RE: HP hw6915, SE M600, Nokia E61, Samsung SGH i320, Motorola Q,
SeldomVisitor @ 7/13/2006 6:09:34 PM # Q
> ...I got this comment in April...

And when was the Motorola Q announced (pricing)?

The universe is not static.


RE: HP hw6915, SE M600, Nokia E61, Samsung SGH i320, Motorola Q,
cervezas @ 7/13/2006 6:54:00 PM # Q
And when was the Motorola Q announced (pricing)?

End of May, I think. Point taken. Although if you've listened to guys like Colligan and Hawkins much I think you can guess that they understand the market quite differently from the way a lot of the Palm OS handwringers do. Right or wrong, Palm sees a real distinction between "mobile computing" and "computeresque mobile phones" and is convinced that the former segment is one they can grow and prosper in without worrying too much about what happens in the latter. The Q can do some things that people want to do with computers (like send and receive email) but Palm probably does not consider it to be a mobile computer. I believe they'd see it this way: anyone who is looking for something like a Pocket PC phone will be sorely disappointed in the Q and those who are not probably wouldn't be in the market for a Treo even if the Q never existed.

Personally, I suspect Palm gets a good number of Treo customers who don't care that much about mobile computing and just buy a Treo for (1) email and (2) status. Those are the ones who will be siphoned off by the likes of the Q. What percentage of Palm's customer base that is I don't really know, but while it will surely make a dent I don't think the Q is a Treo-killer by any means.

The universe is not static.

I tend to think that it revolves around me, so you won't get any argument from me there. ;-)



David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: HP hw6915, SE M600, Nokia E61, Samsung SGH i320, Motorola Q, BenQ
AdamaDBrown @ 7/13/2006 7:08:37 PM # Q
So that would mean that the CDMA Treo models must have a built-in GPS receiver, correct?

No. As far as I'm aware, almost all devices available in the US, both CDMA and GSM, rely on what's called AGPS, or Assisted GPS. This is where the heavy lifting of calculating the phone's position is done by the towers, rather than by the phone locking onto satellites directly. Because this places a burden on the network, it's why GPS-based services aren't more commonly available in phones that don't have a full-scale receiver.

RE: HP hw6915, SE M600, Nokia E61, Samsung SGH i320, Motorola Q,
cervezas @ 7/13/2006 7:27:42 PM # Q
Assisted GPS. This is where the heavy lifting of calculating the phone's position is done by the towers, rather than by the phone locking onto satellites directly.

That is not a correct characterization of A-GPS. While you are correct that A-GPS supplements satellite GPS data with cell tower triangulation, the GPS is (in the most common usage) the primary source of location data. The software I've developed for A-GPS phones is roughly equal in precision to unassisted GPS receivers operating in the same conditions. Even on a sub-$100 iDEN phone I can usually get accuracy within 30-50 meters from a standing position. The iDEN location APIs give you the ability to query the device for different levels of precision or rates of acquisition (which naturally trade off of each other).

AGPS actually has some advantages over unassisted GPS: if you need a quicker (and dirtier) fix on your position you can get it, and if you need a fix indoors you can get it--at least a rough one. The A-GPS phones I've used acquire a usable position noticeably faster than my standalone GPS receivers. I don't know how the AGPS algorithm works, but my guess from using it is that if you are in range of multiple towers but only have a lock on two of the needed three GPS satellites the towers can effectively substitute for the missing satellite without a great loss of precision.

The Sprint and Verizon Treos definitely have A-GPS systems. All new digital CDMA handsets activate in the US since December 31, 2003 have had to have A-GPS under federal law. I don't know why this isn't a requirement for GSM networks like Cingular and T-Mobile but it seems that it isn't.

David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: HP hw6915, SE M600, Nokia E61, Samsung SGH i320, Motorola Q,
PenguinPowered @ 7/13/2006 7:54:56 PM # Q
As far as I'm aware, almost all devices available in the US, both CDMA and GSM, rely on what's called AGPS, or Assisted GPS.

In addition, recall, that e911 is a rolling upgrade, and many phones are grandfathered in. The carriers have until the end of next year, IIRC, to reach 90%.


May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: HP hw6915, SE M600, Nokia E61, Samsung SGH i320, Motorola Q,
cervezas @ 7/13/2006 7:58:55 PM # Q
PenguinPowered wrote:
The carriers have until the end of next year, IIRC, to reach 90%

According to http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/News_Releases/2001/nwl0127a.pdf">this FCC document the end of last year was the deadline and that was to reach 90% of total subscribership. New phone activations (which is what we're interested in here) had to be 100% compliant after the end of 2003.

Was this changed? Either way, I don't think Sprint or Verizon are going to be picking up any phones that don't comply between now and the end of the year, do you?



David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: HP hw6915, SE M600, Nokia E61, Samsung SGH i320, Motorola Q,
cervezas @ 7/14/2006 9:21:11 AM # Q
Just noticed something else that's marginally relevant to the topic but interesting to think about. The Nokia E61 has a Java location API (JSR 179), but does not have a built-in GPS receiver. There are two reasons for this. First, you can still do server-side localization and make that data available to applications. Second, you have a nice, standard API to use for working with location data from a connected BT GPS receiver. What Palm and/or PalmSource really should do is create this native location API and offer it on all future devices just as Nokia is starting to do. Whether there is a receiver onboard (CDMA) or not (GSM) it would enable a whole class of new applications to be developed for Palm devices.


David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: HP hw6915, SE M600, Nokia E61, Samsung SGH i320, Motorola Q, BenQ
Surur @ 7/14/2006 12:09:08 PM # Q
AFAIK Win Mob also has this. It certainlý has GPS multiplexing built-in.

Surur

They said I only argued for the sake of arguing, but after an hour I convinced them they were wrong...
Hey!! I made associate writer at PDA247. Come see my nattering over there!!
http;//www.clieuk.co.uk/wm.shtml

RE: HP hw6915, SE M600, Nokia E61, Samsung SGH i320, Motorola Q,
cervezas @ 7/14/2006 12:53:49 PM # Q
Oh yeah, with the .NET CF you're totally set for doing location-based applications. Surer, do you know what the WM smartphones are that have GPS built in? I know there are a few. Do any come with navigation software built-in?

I'm not saying you can't do location-based apps on a Palm without a specific API or a built-in receiver. I've wrote a couple Palm OS apps some years ago that used GPS and ran on the old Handspring Visor. But including a well-designed API in the system like Garmin does with their version of Garnet and then including in ROM some nice navigation and PIM integration (tap a button in a contact and view a mapped route to their address or fire up audio driving directions) and you'd have a selling point for the device itself. Obviously, you'd need to sell it with an SD card containing all the map data.

Note, if you did the PIM app modification right you could enable mapping and driving directions even on a device that had no access to location information at all. It would work like this: you select someone in your Contacts and tap a button that says "Get directions." If the device doesn't detect a source of GPS data it prompts you with a choice of "Mapped directions" or "Turn by turn text directions." You make your choice then you sync up (cradle or wireless). The device (or desktop conduit, as the case may be) sends a server the two addresses you select (your home or office address and the destination address). The server creates the map images or turn-by-turn directions and installs them in the Contacts database on the device for future reference. You won't be prompted with real-time audio driving directions as you travel if the device didn't detect any position data, but you would be able to thumb through the image tiles or text directions as you go, like the AAA club's TripTik service. In other words, Palm or PalmSource could do this in a way that would degrade nicely when you don't have GPS so it would be useful on *any* Palm OS device. Make it a cool experience and people would be encouraged to upgrade to a device that had full GPS for the full treatment.

David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: HP hw6915, SE M600, Nokia E61, Samsung SGH i320, Motorola Q,
cervezas @ 7/14/2006 1:26:23 PM # Q
David Beers wrote:

I've wrote...

I did graduate from high school. Really. I did.

David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: HP hw6915, SE M600, Nokia E61, Samsung SGH i320, Motorola Q, BenQ
Surur @ 7/14/2006 2:27:24 PM # Q
Surur, do you know what the WM smartphones are that have GPS built in? I know there are a few. Do any come with navigation software built-in?

Theres quite a few. Here's a collection from GPSPassion.

http://www.pbase.com/gpspassion/image/63431234/original.jpg

There is a lot of competition in the WM space. In the pic there is the either the HP hw6515 or HP hw6915, the FSC Loox T830, the Mitac Mio A701 and the Eten G500. There are a few upcoming ones, such as the Gigabyte gsmart i300 and the Benq P51.

Surur


They said I only argued for the sake of arguing, but after an hour I convinced them they were wrong...
Hey!! I made associate writer at PDA247. Come see my nattering over there!!
http;//www.clieuk.co.uk/wm.shtml

I hate you Palm!
scstraus2 @ 7/15/2006 4:03:58 AM # Q
It's official, palm's a bunch of blithering drooling idiots! How many goddamn windows mobile gsm phones do we need? How about 1 single new palmOS model? I'm fed up. I'm going nokia.

Screw You Palm!

Bad day at the office, hon?
freakout @ 7/15/2006 7:17:33 AM # Q
Settle Gretel, it's coming.
Reply to this comment

PalmOS Death Spiral

Gekko @ 7/13/2006 3:59:12 PM # Q

The trend is clear, PalmOS is over. Cascade Failure.



RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
medevilenemy @ 7/13/2006 5:06:23 PM # Q
gekko, can it.

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
cervezas @ 7/13/2006 5:17:36 PM # Q
Please don't feed the troll.

David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog
RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
fierywater @ 7/13/2006 5:51:52 PM # Q
/attempting Gekko-like vague post

When the wall breaks, fortune leads the underwhelming cyclops into the abyss of non-integrated watering squares.

Thus, Palm must fall.

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
pmjoe @ 7/13/2006 5:51:55 PM # Q
Oh please, Palm OS was dead 2 years ago. Unless you call milking Garnet out to version 5.99.999 "living".

They had three of Palm's PDAs (E2, TX, LifeDrive) on display in Best Buy when I was there last weekend, and I nearly had to shed a tear. Nice designs, the hardware was there (and could keep coming), but Palm had zero interest in spending the money to move the Palm OS into the 21st century and keep the Palm platform going. I really hope a lot of people are enjoying their pennies a share and stock options, because that's where it all went.

It really has to be one of the saddest stories of corporate failure in the computing industry over the past decade. They were on top and it's been like a 5 year train wreck in the making. All correctable, even today, but instead you can see in plain sight that they're doing absolutely nothing about it. Somebody is taking this one all the way to the bank.

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
SoS @ 7/13/2006 6:00:47 PM # Q
far more logical than anything gekko could dream up...

I'm sure things were easier before they became more simple

Tungsten T, Lexar 256Mb, Mac G4Ti OSX

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
medevilenemy @ 7/13/2006 6:57:14 PM # Q
Sorry, I don't mean to feed the troll... I'd prefer to fool the troll into staying out until daylight (you LOTR people know what happens next).

Anyway, the PalmOS proper is dead. That isn't because it couldn't be kept up, rather it is because it has basically been abandoned (in development) in favor of ALP and Palm's Palm Linux (or whatever you want to call it).

Either way:
1) Gekko: do us all a favor and find a hobby.
2) There will soon be a successor to PalmOS... I just know nothing about it :-)

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
EdH @ 7/13/2006 11:24:18 PM # Q
medevilenemy said:

2) There will soon be a successor to PalmOS... I just know nothing about it :-)

Revelations 22:20 says the Second Coming will be soon too, but I am not waiting on pins and needles for the rapture. the Second Coming of the Christ may well happen before the second coming of Palm OS.


RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
Foo Fighter @ 7/14/2006 8:54:56 AM # Q
Yeah, there will be a "successor" to PalmOS...it just won't be PalmOS. People fail to realize that PalmOS, as we know it, is gone. The platform currently under development by Access will be a completely new model that bears little resemblance to Palm, with the only kinship being PACE, which will allow you to run Palm applications on this entirely new platform.

But those of you expecting ALP to be PalmOS version 6 (or 7) are in for a rude and very unpleasant awakening. I think the initial reaction among Palm enthusiasts upon seeing the new OS for the first time will be.."WTF is this????"

-------------------------------
PocketFactory, www.pocketfactory.com
Elitist Snob, www.elitistsnob.com

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
cervezas @ 7/14/2006 9:03:53 AM # Q
Foo Fighter wrote:
People fail to realize that PalmOS, as we know it, is gone.

I think what people fail to realize is that the statement that "Palm OS, as we know it, is gone" is so obvious to people as to be embarrassing in its repetition. Why is this empty, meaningless statement trotted out over and over as if it was some sort of exclusive wisdom? Do you honestly think there is widespread belief that Palm OS Garnet is the OS of the future? Or that a successor OS, designed to run on a modern, multitasking kernel and modern hardware is going to be substantially the same as the Palm OS released 10 years ago?

To me it's like someone stroking their beard, taking a puff of their pipe and coming out with "what people don't realize is that video tape, as we know it, is gone."


David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
Foo Fighter @ 7/14/2006 1:36:38 PM # Q
>> "Why is this empty, meaningless statement trotted out over and over as if it was some sort of exclusive wisdom? Do you honestly think there is widespread belief that Palm OS Garnet is the OS of the future?"

Because I keep reading statements in these comments from people who keep talking about "the next version of PalmOS". Or that Palm is developing it's own PalmOS, which isn't true. In such cases it bears repeating; there isn't going to be another PalmOS. Until these comments stop, I'll keep stroking my beard and smoking a pipe, while sipping a fine vintage wine. Peasant! ;-)

-------------------------------
PocketFactory, www.pocketfactory.com
Elitist Snob, www.elitistsnob.com

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
cervezas @ 7/14/2006 2:28:57 PM # Q
It's hardly worth going on about it, but I suppose it's a PIC tradition to do so:

1. The poster you were responding to didn't say something like "Palm OS 7" or the "next version of Palm OS." The poster actually went out of their way to use the awkward term "successor to Palm OS" to avoid the implications that you nonetheless attributed to their remark. The point being that you are so determined to grind this peculiarly pointless axe that you mistake examples that disprove your point as evidence of it.

2. The successor to Palm OS, while it's unlikely to look or work much like the Palm OS we all know, may very well be delivered by the company that owns the Palm brand, and may, in fact be called "Palm OS" just as Mac OSX was radically different from Mac Classic but carried forward the name and tradition. If someone did want to talk about the "next version of Palm OS" I still don't see any implication that they are laboring under this fantasy that you are projecting on them. To the contrary, most people I see participating on forums devoted to the "Palm OS" would be surprised and disappointed if its successor turned out to be some kludgy incremental evolution like Palm OS Garnet was over OS4. Where you get the opposite impression after participating in discussions here for the last few years I'll never know.

But I guess we all create our own little worlds.

David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

Sitting by the fireplace with a fine cognac and my trusty pipe...
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/14/2006 4:20:17 PM # Q
Until these comments stop, I'll keep stroking my beard and smoking a pipe, while sipping a fine vintage wine. Peasant! ;-)


Bwahahahah!

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
freakout @ 7/14/2006 8:56:28 PM # Q
You'd damn well better be wearing tweed as well!

The successor to Palm OS, while it's unlikely to look or work much like the Palm OS we all know, may very well be delivered by the company that owns the Palm brand, and may, in fact be called "Palm OS" just as Mac OSX was radically different from Mac Classic but carried forward the name and tradition.

Exactly!

It makes too much sense for Palm to be creating their own successor OS to dismiss the idea out of hand. Plus there's evidence for it too, in the form of all those job postings. Heck, Marty said they even tried to hire him.

If you were Palm, Foo, would you really hitch all your wagons to MS? (Is that a stupid question to ask you?) ;)

Tim
I apologise for any and all emoticons that appear in my posts. You may shoot them on sight.
Treo 270 ---> Treo 650

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
Foo Fighter @ 7/14/2006 9:56:10 PM # Q
>> "The successor to Palm OS, while it's unlikely to look or work much like the Palm OS we all know, may very well be delivered by the company that owns the Palm brand, and may, in fact be called "Palm OS" just as Mac OSX was radically different from Mac Classic but carried forward the name and tradition."

Interesting theory. But it doesn't hold water. The problem with this conspiracy theory is that you overlook the obvious fact that PalmSource, or rather Access, is the IP (intellectual property) holder of the OS. Palm cannot develop its own legacy compatible OS because they don't own PalmOS itself. That would be like Dell using Open Source WINE to develop their own "Windows" OS. What about emulation you say? Forget it. An emulation environment does not equal a viable operating system. If Palm developed its own emulated "PalmOS" it would be laughed out of the mobile device market.

And you ignore another obvious fact; Palm is a hardware developer (or VAR really)...a very small hardware developer with very limited resources. This isn't Nokia we're talking about here. Ken Wirt said, publicly no less, that Palm intends to eventually settle on ONE PLATFORM. Which platform do you think they intend to settle on? The dying PalmOS platform, with shrinking market share and user base? Or the GROWING platform with GROWING market share and GROWING user base. Not to mention the platform that corporate customers want? As Sigmund Freud said..."Sometimes a Cigar is just a Cigar". I know you hate me repeating this, but as I said, Garnet is end of the line for the Palm platform. There is nothing more beyond this point but a cliff from which Palm will jump entirely into Windows Mobile. It's fun to play UFO theories but at the end of the day a Cigar really is just a Cigar.

"It makes too much sense for Palm to be creating their own successor OS to dismiss the idea out of hand."

On the contrary, it makes NO BUSINESS sense whatsoever. And Palm doesn't have the resources nor the intent to develop their own OS. In case you've all been living under a rock for the past few years, Palm is out of the OS business. And Ed Colligan already outlined Palm's new business model; which is creating their own software layer (or secret sauce if you will) on top of other platforms...all while consolidating on one platform.

"Plus there's evidence for it too, in the form of all those job postings. Heck, Marty said they even tried to hire him.

What evidence? A few Palm fanatics turned a job opening into a elaborate conspiracy theory and clandestine plot to destroy Microsoft and overthrow the free world. I'm a well know Mac fan, but you guys are even more delusional than the any Mac zealots I a have ever encountered.

"If you were Palm, Foo, would you really hitch all your wagons to MS? (Is that a stupid question to ask you?) ;)":

I'm glad you asked this because this is where the issue becomes interesting. In the grand scheme of things, Microsoft may be the evil empire but they have the formula right. IT customers don't want PalmOS. RIM's business model is selling a proprietary email system to corporate customers. Palm just wants to sell volume shipments to enterprise where MS is in demand, and to displace their dying handheld business, which...so far...they've done fairly successfully. Does Palm want to hitch its horse to MS? If Windows Mobile is the growth platform, and its customers want that solution (which of they do) yes of course they will.

By the way, if you're implying I'm a WM fan you are in for a shock. I was until this week a Treo 650 user. Now I'm the proud owner of a Nokia E61 smartphone. And I have another shock; the Nokia E61 makes both the Palm 700p and W a JOKE! I kid you not, wait till you read my review. In every aspect the E61 is superior to the comical Palm solution.

You boys are looking up a dead horse's rectum.

-------------------------------
PocketFactory, www.pocketfactory.com
Elitist Snob, www.elitistsnob.com

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
cervezas @ 7/14/2006 11:04:34 PM # Q
You haven't been keeping up with the whole Palm Linux discussion, Kent. It doesn't really have anything to do with conspiracies and there are several things you seem to have missed:

1. As you yourself pointed out, Palm doesn't need to create their own Linux OS. They can do what they've done since they split with PalmSource: license and customize. There are plenty of commercial embedded Linux vendors out there that they could turn to.

2. Palm's in-house software development resources and expertise far outstrip their hardware development capacity. About 80% of their engineers are software engineers. They don't need to be Nokia and they're not trying to be.

3. Some of the job descriptions for the Linux engineers on Palm's website plainly and specifically state that Palm is creating "a new software platform."

4. You can choose to believe me or not, but an analyst I've spoken with who converses regularly with top management at Palm confirmed to me three months ago that Palm has been building its own platform to hedge its OS risk.

You wrote:
Palm cannot develop its own legacy compatible OS because they don't own PalmOS itself.

Nor have they owned it for the last three years they've been selling "legacy compatible" Palm OS devices. If they want legacy Palm OS support they can continue to license the pieces they need from ACCESS. Or simply develop a clean-room emulator that doesn't use any of ACCESS's IP, just as StyleTap did.

An emulation environment does not equal a viable operating system. If Palm developed its own emulated "PalmOS" it would be laughed out of the mobile device market.

Palm OS has been emulated ever since Palm OS 5 was released and Palm seems to be the only one laughing (all the way to the bank).

Ken Wirt said, publicly no less, that Palm intends to eventually settle on ONE PLATFORM.

Mmm hmm. That was in the same interview where he said "We're very optimistic about Linux - it will give us much broader access to chipsets, different processors and radios, because every vendor that puts out a chipset writes Linux drivers for it."

As Sigmund Freud said..."Sometimes a Cigar is just a Cigar"

My sentiments exactly. Honestly, we've had multiple1 public statements by Palm about their enthusiasm and plans for Linux. We've had repeated statements by Colligan and Wirt like "we intend to continue to focus on multiple platforms for our solutions" (Google found four separate quotes to this effect in the first page of my search). I'm not saying there hasn't been any ambiguity from Palm, but if anything is a UFO it's not Palm's publicly stated Linux plans, it's the Palm's never once stated plans to go completely to Windows Mobile.

Looking forward to your E61 review. I'm going downtown to the new Chicago Nokia store tomorrow to give it a look.

1http://www.vnunet.com/itweek/analysis/2143406/sight-palm
2http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2005120603726NWEM


David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
Foo Fighter @ 7/15/2006 8:21:07 AM # Q
Acquiring a Linux foundation to build a new platform upon is simple enough, as Linux is available on every street corner in Hong Kong. The real challenge is building a custom software stack. Let's say for the sake of argument here that Palm is indeed developing some form of embedded OS. That doesn't necessarily imply they are creating a new "PalmOS" platform. It may in fact turn out to be a basic operating, completely unrelated to PalmOS or Smartphones for that matter, designed for common feature phones. Something to help them develop low-cost consumer phones the likes of Motorola RAZR and SLVR, perhaps? That is by the way where the real bread and butter is in the mobile market. Palm is without a doubt living almost entirely on the fat margins it rakes in on Treos. But if they can deploy a new line of RAZR-like phones that sell in volumes of millions, they can double or perhaps even triple their revenues. Remember, the standard cell phone market is colossal. It dwarfs the niche Smartphone segment. If Palm can manage to carve out even a small slice of the cell phone pie, profits will grow exponentially.

And it's not like Palm's thumb print isn't badly needed in the cell phone market. Aside from Symbian S60, which is actually pretty darn good, have you actually used some of the Motorola, Samsung, Sanyo, LG phones on the market? The embedded OS/software layer is gut wrenchingly awful. Especially Motorola. I have a SLVR L7 that I acquired for casual moments when carrying a smartphone is overkill. It's a sleek little phone, but the software experience is absolute feces. Can Palm create a superior user experience? I think so. They've done it before, even in the customizations made to Windows Mobile 5.

After all, what is Palm...as a brand? Palm is still a proud brand name that embodies mobile lifestyle. I believe that Palm ultimately intends to expand into "new" markets beyond Smartphones, especially considering it's traditional market (handheld organizers) is a dying sector. Smartphones are a growth market, but it makes for a very poor business strategy to rest your company's entire business model on one narrow sector. Apple is a good example. Jobs knew the company needed to branch off into new growth segments and lessen its dependence of Mac revenues. The result; iPod. Unfortunately iPod sales are beginning to taper off for the first time, so now would be a good opportunity to repeat their success with some other new venture. iPhone perhaps?

>> "Nor have they owned it for the last three years they've been selling "legacy compatible" Palm OS devices"

Not quite the same thing. The emulation layer you refer to (PACE) was part of packaged solution, to be used as a transition point for developing on top of a new platform. Just as OSX used "Carbon" as a compatibility layer to move developers over to native "Cocoa" code. How many Mac apps today are still being written in Carbon vs. Cocoa? I'm pretty sure the resounding majority are Cocoa apps.

The difference here is that Palm doesn't own the OS. What you're implying is that Palm will use bits and pieces of Garnet, or rather PACE, to transition developers on to its new platform. Right? Nice theory, but it doesn't hold water because it makes too many broad assumptions that have limited business credibility. Again, I'll point out here that Palm is not the IP holder. This would be like Dell using WINE to create it's own "Windows OS".

>> "If they want legacy Palm OS support they can continue to license the pieces they need from ACCESS. Or simply develop a clean-room emulator that doesn't use any of ACCESS's IP, just as StyleTap did."

This is where the theory of Palm creating its "PalmOS" goes a little of the deep end. First off, what makes you or anyone else here believe that Access is actually going to part out its OS components to Palm? Like your next door neighbor borrowing your lawnmower. This makes absolutely no business sense whatsoever. In fact there is no benefit to Access at all. Quite the contrary it would be a suicidal for them to do so. Basically your saying that Access is going to pro-actively lose its last remaining and largest licensee...and in the process enable them to create a platform that will rival their own? Uh...no, not going to happen. As I've said before, Access didn't pay upwards of 300 Million in cash for PalmSource, simply to turn around and part off the OS like some street corner pawn shop. Access is PalmOS, even despite losing the name "Palm". And there can be only one such OS.

Same with the concept of developing a "clean room emulator". You actually believe that Access is going to allow Palm to create a competing OS capable of (and market as) running its own software layer? Access and Palm would be in court before the first new "PalmOS" hardware even shipped out the door. StyleTap is a poor example, as it's a third party solution. And how many Windows Mobile hardware vendors have you seen that bundled this software with their products, and called their handhelds "Palm-powered"? None, and you never will see that. Just as you will never such a solution from Palm.

Think logically here. What you're saying, essentially, is that Palm and Access will develop segregated "Palm" operating systems, separate but equal. Like the 1950's racial environments that separated restrooms and seating for "Whites" and "Colored". Using real world examples, imagine if Apple licensed out the legacy MacOS 9, allowing another company to create a Mac operating system. What logic would compel Apple to enter into such an arrangement?

This topic makes for good entertainment, but in the end I see no substance.

-------------------------------
PocketFactory, www.pocketfactory.com
Elitist Snob, www.elitistsnob.com

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
cervezas @ 7/15/2006 9:22:34 AM # Q
Foo Fighter wrote:
Let's say for the sake of argument here that Palm is indeed developing some form of embedded OS. That doesn't necessarily imply they are creating a new "PalmOS" platform. It may in fact turn out to be a basic operating, completely unrelated to PalmOS or Smartphones for that matter, designed for common feature phones.

Sure. Except for the fact that they've publicly stated that they're not interested in feature phones. They answer questions about this by stating that Palm is a mobile computing company. I think it's fair to say they have every intention of staying in their niche because it's a niche where they believe they can deliver a competitive product (as you yourself seem to understand below).

And it's not like Palm's thumb print isn't badly needed in the cell phone market. Aside from Symbian S60, which is actually pretty darn good, have you actually used some of the Motorola, Samsung, Sanyo, LG phones on the market? The embedded OS/software layer is gut wrenchingly awful. Especially Motorola.

I've used many of them and agree with your characterization. Motorola, on the whole, is the worst and Nokia S60 and UIQ are about the best smartphone interfaces for non-touchscreen smartphones. But even the best Nokia platforms have failed to spawn interest in mobile applications and data the way Palm OS and Windows Mobile have. Palm has the potential to offer quite a lot but it all has to do with finding better ways to bring the spirit of mobile computing to mid-market devices.

Smartphones are a growth market, but it makes for a very poor business strategy to rest your company's entire business model on one narrow sector. Apple is a good example.

Palm (Hawkins at least) insists that they are branching out by building a new business, but don't expect a foray into consumer electronics like Apple's. Like Apple, though, I do think they are working on network services that will incorporate their devices into more of an end-to-end solution. What I can see from the rather detailed job descriptions is that some of this work has to do with remote device management and firmware over-the-air updates (FOTA). But that may be just the surface, and it presumably concerns their smartphone business as much as anything else they might be cooking up.

Concerning emulation of Palm OS:
The emulation layer you refer to (PACE) was part of packaged solution, to be used as a transition point for developing on top of a new platform. Just as OSX used "Carbon" as a compatibility layer to move developers over to native "Cocoa" code. How many Mac apps today are still being written in Carbon vs. Cocoa? I'm pretty sure the resounding majority are Cocoa apps.

Agreed. In fact, I'd like to amplify the point. Palm gets some benefit from enabling people to install their old applications, but the real goal is to get developers to migrate and create replacement apps that use the new APIs, features and user interface of their modernized system. They don't want to lose their loyal base, but they're going to need to wean everyone from Garnet as quickly as they can. They don't want their business to be tied to it for any longer than absolutely necessary, particularly if they have to keep paying licensing fees to ACCESS.

What makes you or anyone else here believe that Access is actually going to part out its OS components to Palm?

I don't know. The fact that they'd like licensees for the the IP they paid $350M for? Just a thought.

Quite the contrary it would be a suicidal for them to do so. Basically your saying that Access is going to pro-actively lose its last remaining and largest licensee...and in the process enable them to create a platform that will rival their own?

First of all, let me say that there is still a reasonable chance that Palm will go ahead and just license ALP and be done with it. They've been awfully quiet about it, which is troublesome, but maybe they're just building themselves an insurance policy and ALP is really Plan A. Personally, I have doubts and suspect that the relationship between Palm and ACCESS is not going well.

So, if ACCESS was faced with the choice of losing its only substantial licensee and negotiating an extension for the license to Palm OS Garnet would it really be suicide to extend Palm's license? You have to ask yourself:

(1) Is Palm a competitor or customer of ACCESS? It's not like Palm can (or would) re-license its Garnet-emulating Linux platform to other prospective customers of ACCESS.

(2) If Palm is a customer, what does ACCESS lose by keeping them as a customer?

(3) Would having Garnet emulation on Palm's Linux phones be bad for licensees of ALP (which also emulates Garnet)? Let's ask the question another way: is Dell discouraged from licensing the .NET Compact Framework from Microsoft because there are competing vendors doing so? Or do they regard this widespread adoption as a bonus because it represents a recognized and popular standard?

There's one more thing. ACCESS really has no choice in the matter. Palm already has a license to use Garnet through the end of 2009. If they release their new platform next year as I've been told they will that gives them almost two years to migrate the Palm economy away from the Garnet API before pulling the plug. Even if ACCESS doesn't want to play ball, that should be plenty of time for Palm to transition developers and users to the new APIs. After that they can remove the Garnet emulator from their platform and move on.



David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
freakout @ 7/15/2006 9:55:42 AM # Q
Access and Palm would be in court before the first new "PalmOS" hardware even shipped out the door.

Doesn't mean Access would win, though. Emulation is still a massive legal grey area; Access would probably need to prove that Palm's solution encouraged or facilitated software piracy in order to achieve a legal victory, since that's the main argument against emulation. Consider the Sony vs. Connectix (bleem!) case, which ended with Sony buying Connectix out rather than lose the case. And they were almost certainly going to lose, especially given that Sony collected royalties on all PSX software sold and developed and thus bleem! was actually broadening the market for Sony's software.

Even if PalmSource/Access doesn't collect those kind of royalties, they still wouldn't have much of a case without Palm specifically plagiarising their code. If StyleTap hasn't been sued or asked to shut down yet then it shows one of two things: (1) Access know this, or (2) Access don't want to spend the money suing someone who has no money.

Anyhoo, despite your well-reasoned arguments against, I still think Palm will want to avoid becoming Just Another Windows Licensee. Even if their upcoming OS is only a featurephone OS as you suggest, they're still going to want something of their own to run higher-end devices on. Assuming that they don't want that to be Windows Mobile, that really only leaves either ALP or their own Linux solution.

Tim
I apologise for any and all emoticons that appear in my posts. You may shoot them on sight.
Treo 270 ---> Treo 650

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
PenguinPowered @ 7/16/2006 4:43:51 AM # Q
Palm can't afford to be in the dumb phone or feature phone spaces. The margins are thin, it takes big volume to interest the carriers, the shelf life of the product is six months or less, et cetera.

Hawkins isn't at Palm any more. He's off wasting time on an AI dead end. You can pretty much forget about his fifth business.

From what I hear from the rumor mill, Palm and Access are not on the best of terms. Access really doesn't seem to care about a slice of the smart phone pie, and they seem to believe that the non-converged PDA is dead. They've got bigger plans for ubiquitous wi-fi, as described in their annual report, and they seem to see the PalmOS legacy as dead weight.

I still don't believe they spent the money on PalmSource for IP. I still believe they spent it for access to China. And I still believe they got caught in a bidding frenzy and paid more for it than they wanted to.

Palm's trapped. They don't really understand where the handheld wireless device market is going -- nobody does. But Palm can't afford to guess wrong again, and I think they have.


May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
SeldomVisitor @ 7/16/2006 8:13:22 AM # Q
> ...Hawkins isn't at Palm any more...

Years ago he was purportedly a one-day-a-week employee at ==Handspring==. Since he's still on the "management list" as "CTO", whatever that means to Palm, he's probably "at" Palm every once in awhile still.

> ...He's off wasting time on an AI dead end.

He has his relatively-new company called Numenta that he's attempting to push his "AI ideas" with commercially, however he has dropped the Red-whatever Institute into UC-Berkeley's lap and, as far as I could tell from reading the new site, isn't directly affiliated with it anymore (the bored rich, eh?). Maybe he still gives money to it over and above his initial donation:

-- http://www.berkeley.edu/news/berkeleyan/2005/10/12_Redwood.shtml

I still wonder why his Red-whatever joint never discussed Genetic Algorithms...

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
cervezas @ 7/16/2006 7:22:53 PM # Q
PenguinPowered wrote:
Hawkins isn't at Palm any more. He's off wasting time on an AI dead end. You can pretty much forget about his fifth business.

I don't see how Hawkins' activity (or lack thereof) has anything to do with this. The only reason people associate this work with him is because of his reputation as the inventor of the Palm and Treo and because he's the one who's talked about the other business to the press. That doesn't mean it's been his project or that he has much to do with its ongoing development.

Whatever Jeff Hawkins does with his time, there seem to be some pretty prominent developers at Palm that are working on stuff that has nothing to do with Treos or Tungstens these days.


David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

Riddle me this, Marty: What CAN Palm do to survive longterm?
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/16/2006 9:05:08 PM # Q
Palm can't afford to be in the dumb phone or feature phone spaces. The margins are thin, it takes big volume to interest the carriers, the shelf life of the product is six months or less, et cetera.

Palm can't afford to do featurephones BY THEMSELVES. A much smarter route is to arrange for Palm + the Treo franchaise to be bought out NOW, before the Treo name is completely worthless. If you've ever used a Motorola featurephone you would quickly realize how Palm's UI work could benefit a featurephone company.

Hawkins isn't at Palm any more. He's off wasting time on an AI dead end. You can pretty much forget about his fifth business.

Hawkins hasn't been at Palm since he left to start Handspring 8 years ago. He's too busy cashing out his stocks to care. And his dream about creating an Internet/Media tablet + Communicator fusion had one fatal flaw: Moore's Law is relentless. Products like the Sony VAIO UX50 are The Real Thing and are already shipping TODAY. Why use second rate proprietary apps when you can run Real Windows™ applications instead?
http://reviews.cnet.com/Sony_VAIO_UX50/4505-3126_7-31958097-2.html?tag=nav
Microlaptops and Palmtops running Real Windows™ make PalmOS and Windows Mobile devices obsolete. Right now the only barrier to widespread adoption of Windows Microlaptops is their high price. Once economies of scale drop prices to the sub-$1000 level, Hawkins' dream of the ubiquitous multifunction device will have been realized. The only problem is that these devices will be running Windows rather than PalmOS.

From what I hear from the rumor mill, Palm and Access are not on the best of terms. Access really doesn't seem to care about a slice of the smart phone pie, and they seem to believe that the non-converged PDA is dead. They've got bigger plans for ubiquitous wi-fi, as described in their annual report, and they seem to see the PalmOS legacy as dead weight.

Palm tried to play cute with its OS and got exactly what it deserved. Smartphones are about to get punched in the nose by a gang of bulked-up, bad-a$$ featurephones that will be released over the next 6 - 8 months. As I said in my article, smartphones are actually the answer to a question no one was asking. When Treo sales drop this quarter and Palm's channels stay clogged with old, unwanted inventory, panic will set in. If Palm is not sold before the end of this quarter it will likely be too late. At this stage, the only thing Palm can realistically do is to rearrange the furniture (deck chairs?) in an effort to make the company look as attractive as possible to possible suitors. It's time to replace Ed Colligan with someone capable of preparing Palm for a buyout. Colligan's bumbling, inept style undermines all efforts to hype the company.

Hello Moto!

I still don't believe they spent the money on PalmSource for IP. I still believe they spent it for access to China. And I still believe they got caught in a bidding frenzy and paid more for it than they wanted to.

Acces got fleeced. Period.

Palm's trapped. They don't really understand where the handheld wireless device market is going -- nobody does. But Palm can't afford to guess wrong again, and I think they have.

Wrong. Palm can escape certain death Houdini-style just like how PalmSource did last year: become an acquisition target. Nokia and Sony Ericsson understand the cellphone market. Samsung is starting to figure things out. Motorola is confused, as usual. (Imagine where Motorla would be right now if its horrid little RAZR phone hadn't become the cellphone fashion statement du jour...) Palm rode the Treo smartphone filly until it turned into a broken-down old nag. Now Palm seems intent on flogging that now-dead horse. Smartphones are dead, but Palm doesn't have any more tricks up its sleeve these days. The creative Handspring-derived talent has cashed out and moved on and Moore's law has effectively closed the narrow window of opportunity smartphones once enjoyed.


TVoR

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
cervezas @ 7/16/2006 10:36:57 PM # Q
I don't think the idea of acquiring Palm so they can design some other company's feature phone UI makes any sense at all.

Palm's expertise isn't just generic "UI" expertise that you can apply like a coat of paint to any old phone. All of their thinking is geared toward realizing a better experience with mobile data and creating application interfaces for third party applications. Non-smartphones (without becoming smartphones) are not about mobile data (outside of messaging and multimedia), still less about applications (other than the occasional Java game).

Motorola's UI doesn't suck because Motorola is confused. It sucks because it's superfluous. The folks Moto is selling to are perfectly happy not using mobile data or installing software on their phones. What do they need a good UI for? They just need to chat and text and download their ringtones. Even with about the worst UI imaginable, they're able to figure out these basic functions well enough to be content. The rest is just a question of fashion. Motorola understands this and (sadly) has their priorities straight when it comes to making money off of mass market phones.

If Palm is wrong about there being an important niche for mobile computing as TVoR seems to be suggesting they're not going to be saved by acquisition. They'll just go out of business. Mobile computing is what they know and it's what they do. Of course, being right about the future of mobile computing is no guarantee either, but it's not going to be the mass market phones that they'll need to compete with. It's going to be smartphones like the Nokia E61 and (let's hope) devices with more innovative takes on what people's priorities are when they are mobile.

I went down to Nokia's flagship Chicago store this weekend and got my hands on an E61, by the way. It's got some flaws but overall it's pretty darned impressive. Those who keep insisting that S60 is not a smartphone platform are going to need to reconsider.

http://www.pikesoft.com/blog/index.php?itemid=96


David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
hkklife @ 7/16/2006 11:03:54 PM # Q
TvoR;
Aside from basically the 3-year golden period Palm & the Treos enjoyed ('03-'06), can you really say that Smartphones ever really THRIVED? I mean, the market would have to have had some life to it outside a handful of rehashed Treos stringing together some profitable quarters for Palm.

I personally think that smartphones will end up taking up about the same sized niche that dedicated PDAs & handhelds have maintained over the past couple of year. A profitable niche with a couple of major players. T|E2 and Zire type PDAs will still exist in the <$200 market for certain types of users. Smartphones will occupy the $200-$400 segment and micro notebooks & cheapie full size notebooks will be all over the $500 and beyond sphere. Feature phones/dumbphones will continue to grow in capabilities and I forsee major changes coming to the UIs of these devices (like the Verizon + Adobe teamup effort for reskinnable phones UIs supposedly coming out soon)

With the terrific rollout of decent EVDO coverage in the US, a quick stopgap solution for Palm should have been an uber-PDA with DATA-ONLY cellular connectivity. Imagine something like the LifeDrive with a "normal" memory architecture (4gb of flash, no HD) and a high capacity removable battery. Replace the wi-fi radio with an EVDO CDMA one and don't even attempt to give it voice phone functionality. That'd be damm near close to Hawkins' pet project utilizing cheap, off the shelf technology that Palm already has or has had within their various handhelds. Something like that running a dressed-up version of TCMP & a POS version of the Slingbox client would have helped Palm blaze a trail between Treos, traditional PDAs, Hawkins' dream machine and the ultraportable devices TVoR mentions without breaking the bank for Palm...

Pilot 1000-->Pilot 5000-->PalmPilot Pro-->IIIe-->Vx-->m505-->T|T-->T|T2-->T|C-->T|T3-->T|T5-->TX-->Treo 700P

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
cervezas @ 7/16/2006 11:36:09 PM # Q
TVoR wrote:
[Hawkins'] dream about creating an Internet/Media tablet + Communicator fusion had one fatal flaw....

hkklife wrote:
Hawkins' pet project...

Sorry, but I have to say I think it's pretty funny that people assume that (a) the project is Hawkins' and (b) they have the faintest idea what the project is. All this talk of Internet tablets or mobile media machines was pulled out of thin air by someone musing about the meaning of a couple of vague sentences Hawkins' uttered in an interview two years ago. Through sheer repetition this musing has become "knowledge" not only of a specific product, but of a product that "had one fatal flaw" (in past tense!).

What a hysterical example of the constructed reality that is PalmInfocenter! Reminds me of "The followers of the Shoe" and "The followers of the Gourd" in Monty Python's Life of Brian.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Life_of_Brian

David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
hkklife @ 7/17/2006 10:02:02 AM # Q
At least we aren't calling the LifeDrive the ultimate realization of Hawkins' dream, as SOME mobile sites did earlier this year!



Pilot 1000-->Pilot 5000-->PalmPilot Pro-->IIIe-->Vx-->m505-->T|T-->T|T2-->T|C-->T|T3-->T|T5-->TX-->Treo 700P

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
freakout @ 7/17/2006 10:56:47 AM # Q
I don't think the LifeDrive was the ultimate realisation of anyone's dream. More like the embodiment of an horrific, bed-wetting nightmare from hell.
The LD is DEAD (again!)
Surur @ 7/17/2006 11:06:18 AM # Q

The same rules which killed the Treo 650 in Europe has just offed the LifeDrive there also. The difference is that Palm announced a replacement for the Treo 650, but none for the LD.

Read a bit more here
http://www.clieuk.co.uk

Surur

They said I only argued for the sake of arguing, but after an hour I convinced them they were wrong...
Hey!! I made associate writer at PDA247. Come see my nattering over there!!
http;//www.clieuk.co.uk/wm.shtml

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/17/2006 11:17:37 AM # Q
Sorry, but I have to say I think it's pretty funny that people assume that (a) the project is Hawkins' and (b) they have the faintest idea what the project is.

Beersy, you have NO funny how (unintentionally) funny you are. Really.

P.S. Hawkins has left the building. Good night.

TVoR

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
PenguinPowered @ 7/17/2006 1:36:47 PM # Q
I can't imagine who'd buy Palm. But then, I couldn't imagine who'd buy PalmSource before the Access announcement. It'd have to be a player out of left field, though, because the big cell makers and ODMs don't have a match with Palm. Moto's the only one that comes to mind, and buying Palm would be moving in the opposite direction from the one they seem to be taking these days.

If we're still using 'user loadable software, other than ringtone' to distinguish smartphones from featurephones, then the smartphone is definitely not dead or dying.

I don't have a whole lot of faith in Palm's design skills, given that the only evidence of those skills in the last few years has been the ill-fated lifedrive.

May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
hkklife @ 7/17/2006 3:06:18 PM # Q
I liken the LD concept to the smartphone market in Voice's article---how can something be considered "dead" if it was never particularly full of life to begin with?

So let's see: TX & Z22 are "Palm" branded. E2 is in the rebranding/repackaging process. Treo 650 & LD are for all intents & purposes dead. All new 7xx-series Treos are Palm-branded.
There's Palm's lineup going forward.

Really the only thing left to look forward to this year are:
A. Can the 700P be saved via ROM updates?
B. Will there be a 4th Treo this year? Will it run POS? Will the GSM WinMob Treo end up with any providers stateside?
C. Is Palm yet to be acquired in CY06? By whom?

Some possible names who might buy Palm: (all of it is sheer, baseless speculation!)

LG, Haier, Matsushita, Thomson, Asus, Cisco, Sandisk

I personally love to dream about the last one...Sandisk's e200 series has the best shot of anything at dethroning the iPod. Add to an 8mb flash, solidly built PMP device Palm's "wireless" capabilities (be it cellular based or wi-fi based) and the classic Palm PIM apps and it'd be a surefire winner!


Pilot 1000-->Pilot 5000-->PalmPilot Pro-->IIIe-->Vx-->m505-->T|T-->T|T2-->T|C-->T|T3-->T|T5-->TX-->Treo 700P

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
AdamaDBrown @ 7/17/2006 3:20:02 PM # Q
If we're still using 'user loadable software, other than ringtone' to distinguish smartphones from featurephones, then the smartphone is definitely not dead or dying.

If that's the standard, than practically any new GSM phone is a "smartphone." I loaded Opera Mini, Google Local, and Salling Clicker onto my Moto v360, but I don't think that makes it what we would traditionally think of as a smartphone. It is a slippery slope, though. If you include the WM Smartphones, do you have to include the Series 60 devices? If you include them, what about the J2ME phones?

While I don't think that mini-PCs are anywhere even close to prime-time, TVOR has a bit of a point on the subject of smartphones. Aside from the Treos, how many phone-oriented devices have really been successful? The other big success stories are data-oriented devices: Blackberrys and HTC's PPCs. Even the Treos, you could make the argument, are closer to the data side than the voice side. Things like the T-Mobile SDA, Cingular 2125, etcetera, despite being nifty devices, aren't enjoying the kind of high-end success that their more capable cousins do, and they sure aren't tapping into the RAZR sheeple market. Wouldn't it be the ultimate irony if, after the spinners and pundits spent so much time being prophetic and proclaiming the handheld to be dead, that the new major device of the future were the wireless handheld?

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
SeldomVisitor @ 7/17/2006 3:31:33 PM # Q
> ...Sandisk
>
> I personally love to dream about the last one...

At least the CFO would be familiar.

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
hkklife @ 7/17/2006 4:42:38 PM # Q
Adama;

By "the wireless handheld" do you mean something like a TX with a cellular data-only radio in place of the wi-fi radio?
Or something more like the Nokia 770?

I'll say it again--other than its horribly half-arsed voice implementation, the T|W was a fumbling step in the right direction. Palm should've ditched the lame voice-by-headset functionality completely on the T|W and given it specs similar to the T|C.

Look how far ahead of its time the Palm V/m500 + any of the various sled attachments (OmniSky, Motient etc) were for their time.

Check out these blasts from the past:
http://www.palminfocenter.com/news/1246/gsm-snap-on-phone-for-palm-v-announced/

http://www.palminfocenter.com/news/2793/motient-debuts-always-on-wireless-modem-for-palm-v-series/

And $50 a month back in 2001....Verizon is still gouging me for $45/month now for my Treo! Yes, speed & coverage are now vastly improved but will the pricing EVER go down?

P.S. Going back to the well-worn "one device or two" argument:
I know MANY execs who carry a T|E and a RAZR. Or a RAZR and a Treo. Or a RAZR and a BB (probably the most popular combo). Or a slim Nokia GSM dumbphone and a Treo.

Some people still choose to fumble with two devices because each device does its delegated duty the best. Voice on the Treo is an excruciating experience at times and definitely takes a backseat to data functionality. A stable OS & HVGA on a Treo would do world for improving the overall convergence experience.

Pilot 1000-->Pilot 5000-->PalmPilot Pro-->IIIe-->Vx-->m505-->T|T-->T|T2-->T|C-->T|T3-->T|T5-->TX-->Treo 700P

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
cervezas @ 7/17/2006 4:55:27 PM # Q
It is a slippery slope, though. If you include the WM Smartphones, do you have to include the Series 60 devices? If you include them, what about the J2ME phones?

The slope only gets slipperier when you see how Nokia is evolving their S60 phones to be more like their S80 PDA-phones and how Java MIDP 3.0 is looking more like the .NET Compact Framework.


David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
AdamaDBrown @ 7/17/2006 7:05:30 PM # Q
By "the wireless handheld" do you mean something like a TX with a cellular data-only radio in place of the wi-fi radio?
Or something more like the Nokia 770?

I was thinking more in the realm of the former. The HTC models like the Wizard are a fairly good example, as primarily computing-oriented devices that include voice as more or less a side note. Also the Blackberries. These, along with the Treos, are the three groups of converged handhelds that have been skyrocketing--all of them more data device than phone.

If WiMax or some other wide-area broadband tech ever gets off the ground, we might see an increasing number of models using that with optional VoIP rather than be tied to the traditional wireless carriers.

RE: PalmOS Death March
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/17/2006 10:30:07 PM # Q
TvoR;
Aside from basically the 3-year golden period Palm & the Treos enjoyed ('03-'06), can you really say that Smartphones ever really THRIVED? I mean, the market would have to have had some life to it outside a handful of rehashed Treos stringing together some profitable quarters for Palm.

Things started out well a few years ago. In 2003 we had the Samsung i500, the HANDSPRING Treo 600, the Sony Ericsson P800 (with the P900 about to be released). I actually bought a Treo 600 in 2003 and suffered the pain you know all too well of being a PAYING beta tester. Then the wheels fell off the smartphone train: horrible reliability, high price + incremental upgrades from the Treo camp; carrier rejection, stratospheric cost, vaporware teasing from the Samsung camp; incremental upgrades and a terminal case of "brick-itis" from the Sony Ericsson camp. Not to mention the lack of the legendary "killer app" to push smartphone use. ("Push" email should have been the killer app, but Palm dropped the ball by failing to bundle this functionality into all Treos.) Motorola ended up shelving its transforming phone and the market was left to begging for scraps from HTC, who actually responded with a couple of good designs, albeit for Windows Mobile. Surur recently made an interesting post summarizing some of the numerous upcoming Windows Mobile devices, but I wouldn't be surprised to see all of them fail. I believe what the smartphone market desperately needed in 2004 was a phone-centric device made with the high quality of a company like Sony Ericsson. It never happened, and smartphones remained big, ugly niche devices. Now that featurephones have become so powerful, smartphones will inevitably be squeezed out into the land of forgotten niche products along with items like fountain pens...

I personally think that smartphones will end up taking up about the same sized niche that dedicated PDAs & handhelds have maintained over the past couple of year. A profitable niche with a couple of major players. T|E2 and Zire type PDAs will still exist in the <$200 market for certain types of users. Smartphones will occupy the $200-$400 segment and micro notebooks & cheapie full size notebooks will be all over the $500 and beyond sphere. Feature phones/dumbphones will continue to grow in capabilities and I forsee major changes coming to the UIs of these devices (like the Verizon + Adobe teamup effort for reskinnable phones UIs supposedly coming out soon)

You're probably right.

With the terrific rollout of decent EVDO coverage in the US, a quick stopgap solution for Palm should have been an uber-PDA with DATA-ONLY cellular connectivity. Imagine something like the LifeDrive with a "normal" memory architecture (4gb of flash, no HD) and a high capacity removable battery. Replace the wi-fi radio with an EVDO CDMA one and don't even attempt to give it voice phone functionality. That'd be damm near close to Hawkins' pet project utilizing cheap, off the shelf technology that Palm already has or has had within their various handhelds. Something like that running a dressed-up version of TCMP & a POS version of the Slingbox client would have helped Palm blaze a trail between Treos, traditional PDAs, Hawkins' dream machine and the ultraportable devices TVoR mentions without breaking the bank for Palm...

Palm could have easily DESTROYED RIM by combining "push" email into such a device. Now it's too late. A buyout/merger is Palm's ONLY realistic hope.

TVoR


RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/17/2006 11:21:24 PM # Q
Sorry, but I have to say I think it's pretty funny that people assume that (a) the project is Hawkins' and (b) they have the faintest idea what the project is.

Beersy, you have NO idea how (unintentionally) funny you are. Really.

P.S. Hawkins has left the building. Good night.

TVoR

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/18/2006 12:34:08 AM # Q
I can't imagine who'd buy Palm.

- Motorola
- RIM
- Nokia
- LG
- Lenovo
- Apple (Bwahahaha!)
- A fool


But then, I couldn't imagine who'd buy PalmSource before the Access announcement.

Don't be silly. It was obvious that palm0ne/Palm was going to make a move for PalmSource in order to regain control of PalmOS. It was also obvious that a company as rudderless as Motorola would see PalmSource as a quick way to fix their OS headaches and improve their lineup. The only question was whether or not Palm's renegotiated licensing terms with PalmSource would be seen as a big enough poison pill to deter all potential suitors. The main surprise is that Access was desperate/dumb enough to bite as hard as they did. Hook. Line. And sinker.

It'd have to be a player out of left field, though, because the big cell makers and ODMs don't have a match with Palm. Moto's the only one that comes to mind, and buying Palm would be moving in the opposite direction from the one they seem to be taking these days.

Left field? Not necessarily.

If we're still using 'user loadable software, other than ringtone' to distinguish smartphones from featurephones, then the smartphone is definitely not dead or dying.

'user loadable software, other than ringtone' is a useless definition of smartphones. Featurephones are phone-centric, size-conscious cellphones lacking an OS that boasts a broad assortment of standalone, multifaceted, user-installable applications. Smartphones are data-centric, size-agnostic cellphones running OSes that boast a significant library of complex applications which cover most common software categories.

I don't have a whole lot of faith in Palm's design skills,

Join the club.

given that the only evidence of those skills in the last few years has been the ill-fated lifedrive.

Yes, the LifeDrive was a spectacularly craptastic example of Palm's arrogance and greed at its best. The Tungsten 5 was another. In both instances, Palm's smoke and mirrors tricks failed: few people were dumb enough to pay Palm's steak prices for hamburger just because Palm's marketing department labelled them a "chopped steak".


TVoR

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
AdamaDBrown @ 7/18/2006 3:06:32 AM # Q
TVOR wrote:
When Treo sales drop this quarter and Palm's channels stay clogged with old, unwanted inventory, panic will set in.

I thought of this line when I happened to see an interesting article this afternoon:

http://www.fool.com/News/mft/2006/mft06063027.htm?source=ihghlpban100102

The interesting part is where it talks about how Palm's standing inventory suddenly shot up by 63 percent last quarter, and that this contributed to producing a negative cash flow for the first time since 2003.

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
PenguinPowered @ 7/18/2006 2:10:07 PM # Q
- Motorola
- RIM
- Nokia
- LG
- Lenovo
- Apple (Bwahahaha!)

The problem with that list is that none of those players are a good match. Moto was looking for software expertise, not a hardware company. RIM's a service provider, that hardware's just an enabler for. Nokia's got all the skills it needs in this area. LG is doing the ODM thing too well to risk being identified with a particular brand. Apple doesn't buy major pieces.

Lenovo is the only one on that list that I don't have an opinion on, other than that I'd consider them being from left field.

You forgot Google. They're about due to add a hardware company to their mix.


May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/18/2006 11:46:21 PM # Q
You forgot Google.

No I didn't.

;-O

RE: PalmOS Death pirouette
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/19/2006 12:39:22 AM # Q
The problem with that list is that none of those players are a good match.

Wrong.

Moto was looking for software expertise, not a hardware company.

True. And Motorola could easily license PalmOS + integrate it into a Q-like phone. Palm's 1.5 BILLION dollar price tag would only buy Motorola the "Treo" name. Not a good investment, but Nokia is not known for making rational decisions.

RIM's a service provider, that hardware's just an enabler for.

Actually, RIM is both a service and a hardware seller. Strong product in one sphere enhances sales in the other. Right now, RIM's hardware is horrible (just ask anyone using their devices as phones). Selling businesses a complete solution based on RIM server software + Treo hardware defines that at clichéed expression, "synergy".

Nokia's got all the skills it needs in this area.

Yes. And Nokia's upcoming devices are going to hurt the Treo.

LG is doing the ODM thing too well to risk being identified with a particular brand.

I disagree. If there are profits to be had, LG will go for it. But they are much more likely to do it on their own by licensing PalmOS and simply building a better-speced, better quality, less expensive Treo clone.

Apple doesn't buy major pieces.

Apple will be doing its iPhone, but it will be more of a fashion statement media player than a true smartphone. (i.e. exactly what the market wants.)

Lenovo is the only one on that list that I don't have an opinion on, other than that I'd consider them being from left field.

Lenovo could buy its way into the business market just like how it did with laptops by buying IBM's Thinkpad division (and then promptly slashing jobs and quality). Treo would be a good way to improve Lenovo's brand recognition.

You forgot Google. They're about due to add a hardware company to their mix.

The Treo could make an interesting GooglePort™, but I believe Google is better served by creating a fresh data-centric Wi-Fi VoIP device more akin to a smaller version of the Nokia 770.

TVoR

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
freakout @ 7/19/2006 2:10:39 AM # Q
So how come they didn't make your list this time?

Tim
I apologise for any and all emoticons that appear in my posts. You may shoot them on sight.
Treo 270 ---> Treo 650
RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
AdamaDBrown @ 7/19/2006 2:30:12 AM # Q
RIM's a service provider, that hardware's just an enabler for.

True, but you could actually spin that as a reason for them to buy Palm. It would allow them to push off all the hardware work into a semi-independent subsidiary while the main company's energy was focused on the software and services segment.

And this is completely out of left field, but I've been meaning to ask--would you happen to be the same Martin Fouts who sent some stuff in to the guys who make MoS?

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
PenguinPowered @ 7/19/2006 9:58:24 PM # Q
Given my current (lack of) GoogFi access in the pilot program, I'm thinking that GOOG should probably stay away from wireless technology, but yeah, given the electric sheep, it wouldn't surprise me if they don't eventually come up with a Nokia clone.

If RIM wanted to stop designing their own hardware, they'd probably be better off licensing something for HTC, or using HTC as an ODM then going to Palm.

MOS? Not me, I can't even spell Quevillion. ;)

Marty

May You Live in Interesting Times

Typo
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/20/2006 1:29:40 AM # Q
Not a good investment, but Nokia Motorola is not known for making rational decisions.

RE: PalmOS Death spin cycle
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/20/2006 1:47:50 AM # Q
So how come they [Google] didn't make your list this time?

Sorry, I can't say.

>>>RIM's a service provider, that hardware's just an enabler for.

True, but you could actually spin that as a reason for them to buy Palm. It would allow them to push off all the hardware work into a semi-independent subsidiary while the main company's energy was focused on the software and services segment.

RIM + Palm (Rimming + a palmjob? What a match made in SF heaven...) made the most sense. Palm doesn't seem to realize that:
1) Time has run out for them
2) Nokia et. al. are moving in for the kill
3) Smartphones will NOT sell without a strong business tie-in
4) The Treo name will be almost-worthless in 1 year

Given my current (lack of) GoogFi access in the pilot program, I'm thinking that GOOG should probably stay away from wireless technology, but yeah, given the electric sheep, it wouldn't surprise me if they don't eventually come up with a Nokia clone.

What happens when you mix 1 part Nokia 770 + 3 parts HTC Wizard? GooglePort™ happens.

If RIM wanted to stop designing their own hardware, they'd probably be better off licensing something for HTC, or using HTC as an ODM then going to Palm.

Perhaps, but don't forget that the Palm name is still worth something in 2006. Plus, RIM's PDA software is crap. RIM + PalmOS (PACE-style) + Treo = Win Win Win.

Of course, this is all moot. In the end we'll see tiny EVDO/Bluetooth featurephones + tiny Windows XP/Vista palmtops...


TVoR


RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
SeldomVisitor @ 7/20/2006 6:44:40 AM # Q
Nokia talks today at 08:00.

According to various news blurbs that may or may not be based in reality, they're targeting higher end smartphones Real Soon Now.

They have been ambiguous in the past with words about acquisitions so it certainly is not clear to THIS poster if they would be in the market for a PALM. They already self-produce a gajillion phones including the N-series, which is apparently very successful.

08:00 today.

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
cervezas @ 7/20/2006 10:11:09 AM # Q
According to various news blurbs that may or may not be based in reality, they're targeting higher end smartphones Real Soon Now.

Real Soon Now? They've been selling high-end smartphones since Palm was in diapers. Are you suggesting the 9000 series communicators aren't high end? (Or are you somehow distinguishing "smartphones" from "PDA phones," the latter being the way the 9000 series phones seem to be categorized by some analysts?)


David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
SeldomVisitor @ 7/20/2006 11:22:04 AM # Q
Most abject sincere apologies for not word-for-word repeating what today's news blurbs said.

Let me rephrase slightly:

== "...According to various news blurbs that may or may
== not be based in reality, Nokia today said they're targeting
== higher end smartphones in a major way Real Soon Now..."

This MAY be a link that works to a couple links of news articles...:

-- http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Technology/Computer_Hardware/threadview?m=ms&bn=13738&tid=255385&mid=255387&tof=16&rt=1&frt=2&off=1

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
PenguinPowered @ 7/20/2006 10:28:58 PM # Q

Palm doesn't seem to realize that:
3) Smartphones will NOT sell without a strong business tie-in

palm doesn't realize this because it's not true. If Apple did an iPhone, it would sell to the iPod crew. Palm-style smartphones require a business tie in, but that's not the only way to do a smartphone.

What happens when you mix 1 part Nokia 770 + 3 parts HTC Wizard? GooglePort™ happens.

If by "GooglePort" you mean electric sheep bleating at each other until they and their product are irrelevant, then sure.

Looking to Google for wi-fi based hardware is a lot like looking to proctor and johnson for a good airplane.

Plus, RIM's PDA software is crap. RIM + PalmOS (PACE-style) + Treo = Win Win Win. But PalmSource/ACCESS controls PalmOS, not Palm.



May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/20/2006 10:48:59 PM # Q
>>>Palm doesn't seem to realize that:
3) Smartphones will NOT sell without a strong business tie-in


palm doesn't realize this because it's not true. If Apple did an iPhone, it would sell to the iPod crew. Palm-style smartphones require a business tie in, but that's not the only way to do a smartphone.

Wrong, Marty. Apple is not run by fools: iPhone will not be a traditional smartphone. It's a featurephone with all the features + media apps people want and none of the geeky fluff only propellerheads ask for. Traditional smartphones are DEAD. D-E-A-D. (Of course, if you want to play games with how to define the term "smartphone", go right ahead. It's not hard to twist definitions to claim ANY device is a smartphone.)

As I said in my article (I posted it to another thread since Ryan apparently didn't want to publish it): Smartphones are an answer to a question no one is asking.

>>>What happens when you mix 1 part Nokia 770 + 3 parts HTC Wizard? GooglePort™ happens.

If by "GooglePort" you mean electric sheep bleating at each other until they and their product are irrelevant, then sure.

While I would never touch a GooglePort™ with a 10 foot pole, I'm sure millions of Budweiser-swilling, NASCAR-watching, Nextel-squawking lumpen will be lining up to chug Goog-Aid™ the second it's released. You'll see. Soon.

Looking to Google for wi-fi based hardware is a lot like looking to proctor and johnson for a good airplane.

Proctor and WHO? Does Happy Hour start early in South Bay, Mr. Fouts? Without the device, GoogleNet is useless. Google already has the bandwidth, the software, the services, the advertising customers, the buzz, the name recognition and the mobile OS. Do you really think the hardware is missing? Wake up Marty!.

>>>Plus, RIM's PDA software is crap. RIM + PalmOS (PACE-style) + Treo = Win Win Win. But PalmSource/ACCESS controls PalmOS, not Palm.

Are you SURE PACE can't be replicated, Deckard? In my dream, a company called StyleTap does this. And Cobalt is for sale to the highest sucker bidder.

TVoR

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
PenguinPowered @ 7/21/2006 2:38:21 AM # Q
Wrong, Marty. Apple is not run by fools:

Of course not. It's run by iFools.

iPhone will not be a traditional smartphone. It's a featurephone with all the features + media apps people want and none of the geeky fluff only propellerheads ask for. Traditional smartphones are DEAD. D-E-A-D. (Of course, if you want to play games with how to define the term "smartphone", go right ahead. It's not hard to twist definitions to claim ANY device is a smartphone.)

As far as I know, you're the only one who has ever made the geeky fluff only propellerheads ask for claim about smartphones. Certainly the most wide spread definition (the one you can find at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphone for instance) would include what you're describing iPhone as going to be.

Proctor and WHO?

You know, proctor and johnson, the other half of johnson and gamble.

Google already has the bandwidth, the software, the services, the advertising customers, the buzz, the name recognition and the mobile OS. Do you really think the hardware is missing? Wake up Marty!.

You have it backwards. Hardware's easy to come by; you just get HTC to ODM it for you. It's the "mobile OS" that GOOG is missing. Er, no, wait. I've seen GOOG's server farm. I wouldn't trust them to do a good job on the hardware, either.

Anyway, the GOOG's track record, outside of search and associated advertising is pretty abysmal. And I think they are perfectly aware of this. When you factor in the electric sheep, I wouldn't worry too much about GOOG producing anything interesting in the next couple of years.

May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
SeldomVisitor @ 7/21/2006 7:10:52 AM # Q
> ...the one you can find at
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphone for instance)...

Oh good grief.

Anyone can go to that "definition" and add/change it to their heart's content. Citing that source as some sort of authoritive answer to something is just plain silly.

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
PenguinPowered @ 7/21/2006 12:43:28 PM # Q
i picked wikipedia because it's easily accessible, not because it's authoritative.

It also currently has the most commonly accepted definition of smartphone on it.



May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
SeldomVisitor @ 7/21/2006 3:19:13 PM # Q
Today when I pointed out that the TREOs are not on Microsoft's Mobile's "Americas smartphones" page(s), the post generated the response that the TREOs were not smartphones...

-- http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Technology/Computer_Hardware/threadview?m=tm&bn=13738&tid=255479&mid=255505&tof=-1&off=1

RE: PalmOS Death stagger
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/22/2006 12:04:44 AM # Q
>>>Wrong, Marty. Apple is not run by fools:

Of course not. It's run by iFools.

;-O

iFools selling iPoo.

>>>iPhone will not be a traditional smartphone. It's a featurephone with all the features + media apps people want and none of the geeky fluff only propellerheads ask for. Traditional smartphones are DEAD. D-E-A-D. (Of course, if you want to play games with how to define the term "smartphone", go right ahead. It's not hard to twist definitions to claim ANY device is a smartphone.)

As far as I know, you're the only one who has ever made the "geeky fluff only propellerheads ask for" claim about smartphones. Certainly the most wide spread definition (the one you can find at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphone for instance) would include what you're describing iPhone as going to be.

Like I said, it's easy to twist the smartphone definition to mean ANYTHING you want it to mean. In my opinion, without an OS boasting a large library of independent, user-installable applications (sorry, Java games and ringtones don't count) and a data-centric (or at least POTENTIALLY data-centric) design, a device should NOT be considered a smartphone. As I have said elsewhere, it is inevitable that bulked-up featurephones (smart dumbphones) will kill off true smartphones. Smartphones offer few functions that a well-designed featurephone cannot perform. It amazes me that most people don't seem to realize this yet.

Proctor and WHO?

You know, proctor and johnson, the other half of johnson and gamble.

Is that the company that donates a portion of their profits to the Church of Satan? Where's "Conspiracy" Schlesinger when you need him?

>>>Google already has the bandwidth, the software, the services, the advertising customers, the buzz, the name recognition and the mobile OS. Do you really think the hardware is missing? Wake up Marty!.

You have it backwards. Hardware's easy to come by; you just get HTC to ODM it for you. It's the "mobile OS" that GOOG is missing. Er, no, wait. I've seen GOOG's server farm. I wouldn't trust them to do a good job on the hardware, either.

Like I said, do you really think the hardware is missing? One phone call to any of a dozen Taiwanese ODMs and GooglePort™ would be ready for testing within a few months. I never suggested Google will build the GooglePort™ themselves. Why would they want to? And GOOG-OS is not "rocket surgery" or (Hawkins-style) "brain science". KISS principle (something foreign to the dumba$$es at PalmSource/Palm) reigns supreme. If you know anything about Google's acquisition history, you'd realize that GOOG-OS is a done deal.

Anyway, the GOOG's track record, outside of search and associated advertising is pretty abysmal. And I think they are perfectly aware of this. When you factor in the electric sheep, I wouldn't worry too much about GOOG producing anything interesting in the next couple of years.

How harsh, Marty. Google has the money, the brainpower, the software assets, the aggressiveness and the leadership to bring it all together. Now. My only question is whether or not the telcos and the cellcos are going to let Google fcuk them up by blowing up a 100 year communications revenue model overnight. I'm not sure how you can attack Google's "track record" when they haven't even formally announced their plans yet. So far all that has been apparent is akin to an arms buildup. The War of the Worlds is about to begin.

- These ALREADY are interesting times...

TVoR

RE: PalmOS Death Spiral
PenguinPowered @ 7/22/2006 4:42:26 PM # Q
In my opinion, without an OS boasting a large library of independent, user-installable applications (sorry, Java games and ringtones don't count) and a data-centric (or at least POTENTIALLY data-centric) design, a device should NOT be considered a smartphone.

Java games most certainly count. Emphasis on games is a noticable part of what separates the non-business smartphone customer base from the business smartphone customer base.

GOOG-OS is not "rocket surgery" or (Hawkins-style) "brain science". KISS principle (something foreign to the dumba$$es at PalmSource/Palm) reigns supreme. If you know anything about Google's acquisition history, you'd realize that GOOG-OS is a done deal.

Actually, I know enough about GOOG's acquisition and hiring history to know that GOOG-OS is a (never-going-to-be)-done deal. ;)

I'm not sure how you can attack Google's "track record" when they haven't even formally announced their plans yet. So far all that has been apparent is akin to an arms buildup.

Because it's bad?

GOOG has attempted to position several non-search commercial products against competitors and has failed in every instance. If you know enough about GOOG culture, you can even see why the failures are inherent in their culture. I don't see anything in GOOG's behavior to suggest that'll change in the next 5 years.



May You Live in Interesting Times

Reply to this comment

My predictions

hkklife @ 7/13/2006 2:49:03 PM # Q
Lowrider will simply be a Treo 650 that's been "made safe" and has been slightly modernized & streamlined from a style/OS/formfactor standpoint.

I'd bet on either a 160*160 screen (Z22 style) if it's gonna be super low-end OR the same Treo 650 screen if it's going to be a midrange device.

Palm can either do one of two things:
(all guesstimated prices are $USD with Cingular-I have no idea what the European pricing is like nowdays for smartphones)

1. Take the Z22's guts (200mhz CPU, 32mb NVFS, 160*160 screen)add the 650's EDGE radio & VGA camera and use the latest/final version of FrankenGarnet. Sell it for $200ish w/ contract in a thinner/sleeker formfactor with a few blue LEDs thrown in for good measure to attract the hipster/bling crowd. A low-end device perfect for a "low end" OS like Garnet. I predict this is the most likely scenario.

OR

2. Palm can take the 650, give it 2x the RAM, and add a few bells'n whistles such as a 1.3mp camera-maybe with a flash, a standard 3.5mm headphone jack and maybe an internal storage drive. Essentially, take the best bits of the 700P but throw in some added multimedia functionality to make up for the lack of UMTS. This could still be a solid midrange smartphone running POS selling for $300ish w/ contract. It'd also make a good basis for....drumroll.....a refreshed CDMA Treo (770P?) next year if Palm needs to buy themselves some more time to work on their home-brewed Linux stuff or wait for Access to finish up ALP.

Pilot 1000-->Pilot 5000-->PalmPilot Pro-->IIIe-->Vx-->m505-->T|T-->T|T2-->T|C-->T|T3-->T|T5-->TX-->Treo 700P

RE: My predictions
Surur @ 7/13/2006 6:14:15 PM # Q
I have no idea what the European pricing is like nowdays for smartphones

If its low end it would have to be free with a contract. As an example, I got my HTC Universal (3G UMTS, VGA screen, large keyboard, WIFI etc etc) for £100 ($180) with a £26/month ($46) with unlimited data. See also the HTC Wizard ( Cingular 8125) sells from free to £85 ($200) with a contract.
http://tinyurl.com/rw7ec

It would have to be free, not $200.

Surur

They said I only argued for the sake of arguing, but after an hour I convinced them they were wrong...
Hey!! I made associate writer at PDA247. Come see my nattering over there!!
http;//www.clieuk.co.uk/wm.shtml

RE: My predictions
cervezas @ 7/13/2006 8:20:21 PM # Q
I'm predicting... drumroll...

Monochrome screen and OS 4.1! Motorola 68k processor! 16Mb real RAM! Woo hoo!

Oh, wait. That was wishful thinking, not prediction.

What was the matter with monochrome (he asks knowing that everyone but him understands this intuitively)? My Visor and Sprint Digital Link module used to run for 7-10 days on a charge. The only time the Visor used to crash was during the winter when I shuffled across the rug and zapped it good with a static discharge. Fifteen seconds later I was back in business.

Those were the days. :-/

David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: My predictions
freakout @ 7/13/2006 10:05:02 PM # Q
I predict the Lowrider/Nitro will simply be an evolutionary upgrade to the 700p - which is fine with me - with perhaps a bit more RAM, better Bluetooth handling, and improved camera software but same hardware, sorta like the 600-to-650 camera software improvement (which really was remarkable). I also predict that the 2.5mm jack will remain, because Palm are happy to sell 3.5mm adapters at a tidy profit. Annoyingly.

I hope I'm not right because it would be nice to see something more imaginative (like hk's suggested internal storage drive - as long as it's not a buggy mess like the Lifedrive, that is). But Palm haven't been particularly imaginative lately. Once this new form factor is introduced it'll be interesting to see where they go next...

If Palm really wanted to go after the "mediaphone" segment, it'd be very simple:

*Retain the 650's high-res screen. If they want to be really adventurous, drop the keyboard (or put it on a slider) and make it 320x480. Or even better, release two versions - one with, one without.
*Standard 3.5mm jack (of course)
*PTunes Deluxe (or mOcean, if they can polish themselves up a bit) and TCPMP (it's free dammit Palm!). Put that pretty new 700p UI on top. Add a simple media syncing function to Quick Install/Hotsync, so people don't have to go through Windows Media Player (shudder). Playlist management isn't that hard. And include some automatic video conversion software too, which is also freely available.
* A generous amount of onboard storage (4GBs of flash ram would be nice).
* Make it prettier.
* Market the hell out of it.

Who knows? They could even be a serious competitor for Apple's upcoming iPhone or Microsoft's Zune thingamajigger if they got it right.

But something tells me Palm don't have the resources or the vision to pull it off. Buyout, anyone?

Tim
I apologise for any and all emoticons that appear in my posts. You may shoot them on sight.
Treo 270 ---> Treo 650

RE: My predictions
palmdoc88 @ 7/21/2006 8:41:36 AM # Q
I would happily upgrade to a GSM PalmOS Treo with 64 MB Ram 1.3 MP camera, GPRS/Edge, latest Garnet NVFS bug fixes, updated bundled software.
This would be an interim device for me until we see what ALP has to offer :P

------------
http://palmdoc.net
Reply to this comment

Lots of announcements of new devices

Tuckermaclain @ 7/16/2006 2:30:20 PM # Q
...but no devices. Is Palm out to capture the vaporware market?
RE: Lots of announcements of new devices
cervezas @ 7/16/2006 3:48:41 PM # Q
What do you mean "lots of announcements"? There's been one that I know of. Everything else that's been announced has already shipped.

David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog
RE: Lots of announcements of new devices
Tuckermaclain @ 7/16/2006 5:12:02 PM # Q
We are supposed to see 4 new devices this year. Still waiting on Hollywood/ Lowrider. Not wishing to slam Palm or wish them bad will(I love my Palm since my first Visor in 2000)--just pointing out the increasing gap between announcements and devices on the shelves. Still waiting and hoping for the 320x480 TX with a phone. To package it 515-like would be Innovative (note cap "I")

Reply to this comment
Start a New Comment Thread Top

Account

Register Register | Login Log in
user:
pass: