MobileInfocenter

Comments on: PalmSource Exhibiting ALP at LinuxWorld SF

PalmSource will be exhibiting the Access Linux Platform at LinuxWorld San Francisco, August 14-17th. There will also be a special PalmSource Developer Day, which includes a number of sessions on ALP and will give Palm OS developers a first chance to try out existing Palm OS applications on ALP.
Return to Story - Permalink

Article Comments

 (85 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

Count me in!

dkirker @ 7/24/2006 8:07:34 PM # Q
Count me in!

Does anybody know what requirements there will be to access the Developer Day? I'll probably only get a free Exhibit Hall only pass. Hopefully that will allow me into the Developer Day.

-Donald

RE: Count me in!
dkirker @ 7/24/2006 8:13:06 PM # Q
Never mind. $95 for the Developer Day alone.

I assume ALP will be demo'ed in the Exhibit Hall?

RE: Count me in!
Ryan @ 7/24/2006 8:20:22 PM # Q
Thanks, I made a note about that.
RE: Count me in!
cervezas @ 7/24/2006 9:00:37 PM # Q
Actually, when you go into the registration site it says it's $195 for the Developer Day and from what I understand that's the real price (pretty reasonable, really). The exhibits are free, so anyone should be able to see a demo at the ACCESS booth.

I'm planning to fly in for the Dev Day. The sessions actually sound pretty good and I'm looking forward to talking with the PalmSource folks. It'll be interesting to check a couple of Palm OS applications out at the Compatibility Station, too.



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

RE: Count me in!
LiveFaith @ 7/24/2006 10:19:31 PM # Q
I wonder how many Palm Inc. folks will be there? That may tell us a lot.

Pat Horne
RE: Count me in!
cervezas @ 7/24/2006 11:41:18 PM # Q
Nope, it's $95 after all. They should have it corrected tomorrow, according to Tom Chavez at PalmSource.


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

RE: Count me in!
KultiVator @ 7/25/2006 5:25:47 AM # Q
I wonder how many Palm Inc. folks will be there? That may tell us a lot.

My thoughts exactly.

I wonder if, aside from demoing the ALP platform on a simulator, they'll have some pre-production handhelds of any kind on show in the developer sessions (obviously not on public display on the show floor). I think we all need to feel some optimism that ALP will actually arrive on handsets outside of the Asian market.

Words can hardly express how crucial this leg of PalmSource's journey really is... their whole future is in question, so this event is the key PR opportunity they need to herald the coming of the next big thing (or the next big non-event) in handheld computing.

I only wish I could be there to see events unfold!

KultiVator

RE: Count me in!
Gekko @ 7/25/2006 7:53:01 AM # Q

Prepare to be amazed!!!!!!

http://tinyurl.com/gumwh

p.s. If you want to find Beersie, just hang out over by the buffet table.



RE: Count me in!
LiveFaith @ 7/25/2006 2:47:10 PM # Q
That link is to somebody's photoshop hack job. Here is the official ALPOs link ...

http://tinyurl.com/fofyu


Pat Horne

Reply to this comment

Admin...

legodude522 @ 7/24/2006 9:51:24 PM # Q
You going Ryan?

Palm m125>Palm Zire71>Tapwave Zodiac 1>Palm Zire 72>Sharp Zaurus SL-C1000
[url=http://yatuc.com/3d_]Zaurus for sale![/url]
[url=http://yatuc.com/y2]Palm screen repair guide.[/url]
Reply to this comment

No public SDK yet?

asiayeah @ 7/25/2006 11:23:45 AM # Q
If PalmSource is serious about getting the existing Palm OS Developers to move to ALP, they should really start releasing their SDK to all Palm OS Developers.

They really have to do it aggressively, otherwise Palm OS Developers will find it easier to switch to other more mature and easily accessible platforms, such as Windows Mobile or the Symbian. Right now, there's still very little incentives for a 3rd party software developer to move to the ALP yet...

--
With great power comes great responsiblity.

RE: No public SDK yet?
cervezas @ 7/25/2006 12:00:00 PM # Q
The SDK is not supposed to be released until around the end of this year. All Palm developers are anxious for this to be released sooner rather than later, but knowing how this stuff works I can tell you that all the prospective licensees (the real customers) are saying "we need X", "no Y is a deal-breaker for us", and "replace X and Y with Z and we'll sign". Add to this the decisions that are being made by the mobile Linux standards initiatives and PalmSource's need/desire to comply with those. An SDK is a contract with developers that you need to be able to keep for the long term and it's not like the good ol' days when Palm OS was purely proprietary and Palm was developing the OS just for use on their own hardware.

IMO, it'll be a pretty big achievement to have a public SDK ready in the next 5 months. I'm impressed that they're ready to give hands on exposure at a developer conference to the SDK and tools they have right now.

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

RE: No public SDK yet?
LiveFaith @ 7/25/2006 2:51:31 PM # Q
I would love to see this pulled off for "Palm OS to run on top of Linux", but it seems awfully ambitious as you refer to.

Pat Horne
RE: No public SDK yet?
cervezas @ 7/25/2006 3:36:50 PM # Q
The part about "Palm OS running on Linux" is the easy part. GHost was in place in some form back in February. The hard part is the new application framework and all the new modern services that support it.

We should have a lot better idea how far along things are after this conference.


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

RE: No public SDK yet?
Foo Fighter @ 7/25/2006 5:12:22 PM # Q
>> "The part about "Palm OS running on Linux" is the easy part."

Agreed, and I don't understand why that option aroused even the slightest interest among anyone here. Who would want Garnet sitting on top of Linux? What would be gained?

The real question is what is this platform all about, and how much "Zen of Palm" went into its DNA. The biggest story will be MAX, it's APIs, and its GUI environment. So far we know nothing about the GUI and what it will look like. We've seen a few vague screenshots of something that may or may not be ALP and then dead silence.

If Access shows off the same environment with little more explanation, good luck enticing developers.

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

RE: No public SDK yet?
cervezas @ 7/25/2006 6:45:42 PM # Q
Who would want Garnet sitting on top of Linux?

Uh... just a guess: people who have Palm OS software they want to use?

You're an Apple buff, Kent. Why don't you ask yourself this question: why do so many Mac users want Windows sitting on top of their new MacBook Pro? I think you know, and there's your answer.


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

RE: No public SDK yet?
SeldomVisitor @ 7/25/2006 7:30:30 PM # Q
The number of people who would want PalmOS software to run on their Linux whatevers would be down in the noise level.

Don't believe the PR-crap about firmness/longevity of loyalty.

Make a new mousetrap and the world is yer oyster.

or something like that...

RE: No public SDK yet?
cervezas @ 7/25/2006 7:45:06 PM # Q
The number of people who would want PalmOS software to run on their Linux whatevers would be down in the noise level.

So you don't think anyone would care if ALP dropped GHost and Palm announced tomorrow that it's all Windows Mobile from here on out, eh?

I don't place a huge amount of stock in Palm OS loyalty, but I think there's something to be said for smoothing the transition to a new OS so you don't alienate a sometimes passionate and vocal group of customers you already have. Within a couple of years after ALP or Palm's Linux OS comes out no one will care if they ever see another Garnet application again, but you gotta get them to that point first.

In the final analysis ACCESS is going after a much bigger market than existing Palm OS users and only need that group to prime their pump a bit when ALP is first released. That may be part of what concerns Palm, actually.


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

RE: No public SDK yet?
LiveFaith @ 7/26/2006 12:01:54 AM # Q
Dave,

Ya know, that theory makes sense to me. I keep asking myself why Access sank $300M+ into Nagel's going away party. They appear aloof from the the Palm OS community that they paid so dearly for. Evidence points to the strong probability that Garnet will not be supported. Do these people have more $$$ than brains?

Your analysis is one of two that I can fathom. Maybe the biz-plan calls for using the Palm OS world as a launching pad for the first "mainstreamed" mobile-Linux-dominates-the-world platform. Maybe they saw that Palmsource (Palm OS) had the feelgood household name, plus they were quite some distance down the pike to actually bringing mobile Linux into reality.

Don't know if they'll pull it off, but it seems that they are ...
#1 Using Palm OS reputation, name recognition, and dedicated and large following to "prime the pump". All to bring the mobilinux dream to fruition.
#2 Palmsource had already sold it's soul to the Linux underpinnings and at least the ball was rolling?

... if they are able to pull it off and bring ALPOs to the table as a true player with WinMollasses & Symbian, then $300M is pocket change.

Pat Horne

RE: No public SDK yet?
SeldomVisitor @ 7/26/2006 6:32:54 AM # Q
> ...Within a couple of years after ALP or Palm's
> Linux OS comes out no one will care if they ever
> see another Garnet application again...

That essentially was the point of my post in the context of the other prior posts discussing "Palm(OS) developers developing".

RE: No public SDK yet?
PenguinPowered @ 7/28/2006 9:39:01 PM # Q
They appear aloof from the the Palm OS community that they paid so dearly for.

They didn't pay for the Palm OS community. They paid for Access to China via CMS.

They paid too much because they got caught up in a bidding frenzy.


May You Live in Interesting Times

Reply to this comment

A good sign

scstraus2 @ 7/25/2006 3:00:54 PM # Q
I look forward to any coverage anyone can give of this!

I think it's a very good sign that PalmSoft is giving reasonably low level programming lessons on ALP this quickly. Sounds like the've got all the basics up and running, the PalmOS virtualization and general application API's.

I pray to god Palm comes to their senses and gets their act together and deploys this version finally. I get so depressed thinking about moving to another platform after 10 years of productive PalmOS use, but if this doesn't come off there will be no choice.

RE: A good sign
cervezas @ 7/25/2006 4:23:22 PM # Q
I think it's a pretty good sign, too, actually.

I wouldn't worry too much about whether Palm adopts ALP or does their own Linux platform, though. Either way I think we can expect future Palm devices to have backward support for old Palm OS applications (for a while) and developers doing cool new things with the new platform.


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

RE: A good sign
Foo Fighter @ 7/25/2006 4:59:24 PM # Q
>> "and developers doing cool new things with the new platform."

Well that depends entirely on how "cool" or viable the new platform is, doesn't it? What makes you think developers are going to get on board? I certainly don't that's going to happen anytime soon, if ever. What I'm betting will happen is this...instead of developers writing for the new platform, they'll simply keep developing for what they know; Garnet. Think about it, if PACE layer works really well, as it should, why bother learning do develop for an entirely new API environment. If your app runs on Garnet it should behave on ALP, or so we're led to believe. Besides, if you visit just about any mobile software dev website you'll notice the vast majority are writing for other platforms now. Developers who write strictly for PalmOS are few and far between, so I doubt migrating to ALP is a big priority for PalmOS developers right now. Most are probably wondering how much longer they'll continue supporting the platform.

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

RE: A good sign
PenguinPowered @ 7/25/2006 5:14:21 PM # Q
I don't think Palm and Access are getting along.

I don't think anyone outside the US cares about Ghost on ALP.

I don't think ACCESS is going to introduce ALP into the US first. (It's a toss up, in my mind, between China and Japan, but if they show ALP on a Hier phone at LinuxWorld, I'll bet on China.)

The reason why developers would want to move from Ghost to the ALP interface, if they did, would be support for features on the phone that Garnet doesn't support.



May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: A good sign
cervezas @ 7/25/2006 5:18:02 PM # Q
Developers want to target devices that sell well and sell the idea of adding third party software to users. That's pretty much the long and short of it. Developers probably will wait to develop for ALP until there are some promising looking devices on the horizon and most will wait to see that those devices are selling well. It's way too early to say whether ACCESS's incomparable access to operators and ODMs will give ALP anything like the stature than NetFront has in the mobile software world. There's a lot of jockeying for position right now with regard to mobile Linux. So at this point it's anyone's guess how much of a bite it can take out of Symbian, how many players the market will support, and which, if any, will dominate.

But worldwide Linux has already cleaned the clock of Palm OS and Windows Mobile and some much bigger Linux plays are in the works. Any mobile software developer who isn't watching Linux right now and trying to understand this market is going to miss a pretty good ride, in my opinion.

Since you asked: What ALP should deliver than Palm OS cannot is (a) robust multi-tasking including support for multiple simultaneous network streams, (b) applications that don't take down the whole system when there's a bug, (c) a SQL database engine for powerful business applications (extra $$$ on WM or Symbian), (d) state-of-the-art multimedia capabilities, (e) the latest hardware getting to market faster because Linux drivers are written first, (f) an influx of innovation from Linux developers. Those are the big things. There are lots of smaller ones like remote device management, better one-handed operation, an interface that conforms with standard user expectations like the presence of soft buttons. I'm probably leaving a lot out, but you get the idea: ALP is aimed at operators and device vendors who want the power of an operating system like Symbian or Windows Mobile, but don't want to depend on rapacious Microsoft or competitor Nokia for it.

It's going to be very interesting to watch how this drama unfolds and I'd like to get a front-row seat, which is one reason I'm heading out to PalmSource Developer Day next month.


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

RE: A good sign
Frenchie @ 7/25/2006 5:38:25 PM # Q
If Access wants this to succed ALP has to be released in the US and Europe. I've seen too many phones and products that are released in Korea, Japan, and China never make it to the states let alone Europe.

I don't know about you guys but I've had it with all of these great technological achievements release in the Asian markets. Of course I do know that most of their makers began their businesses in the Asian market.

You see, I've kind of gotten really frusterated with how the US and Europe miss out on really great products for some stupid reason (a million are popping into my head).

The only way for this to work is for a global release. For all I care if ALP isn't in the US market it's as useless to me as Cobalt.

RE: A good sign
cervezas @ 7/25/2006 6:06:22 PM # Q
Frenchie wrote:
If Access wants this to succed ALP has to be released in the US and Europe. I've seen too many phones and products that are released in Korea, Japan, and China never make it to the states let alone Europe.

Unfortunately, all that proves is that ACCESS doesn't have to release in the US and Europe to succeed. The Asian market is much bigger than either North America or Europe.

Still, ACCESS is very global already in the way it markets its products, so while I agree with Marty that Asia will probably see ALP devices first, I wouldn't count out that we see them making their way over to this side of the Pacific before long. And some of the European operators seem to be enthusiastic about Linux on phones.

I agree with Marty, though: I don't get a good feeling right now about Palm being the company that brings ALP to the US. They've got other plans that we'll hear about next year, I think.

The good news is, I do think Palm is thinking about putting that David Nagel button on an upcoming Palm OS Garnet Treo: http://tinyurl.com/fofyu

I understand that this provides speed-dialing directly to Nagel's personal cellphone where delighted users can thank him personally for all he has done for the Palm OS platform. The same button shows up in the new Mac OS version of Palm Desktop so Apple users can chime in with their words of heartfelt thanks! ;-)


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

So Marty...
cervezas @ 7/25/2006 6:26:21 PM # Q
Is PIC's favorite Linux lizard going to be slithering around LinuxWorld next month?


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

Pick your Linux
cervezas @ 7/25/2006 6:28:46 PM # Q
For those who are gnashing their teeth about whether ALP will ever show up on a Palm Treo, here's a thought to chew on:

Since a lot of the components of ALP are (or will be) open source, I wonder how long it will take Linux hackers to reverse engineer the parts that aren't and get them running on some nice hardware we do have here in the US?

If Linux continues its steady incursion into phones I can see a day not too far when there is active trade of hacked ROM images that people will use to replace one Linux OS with another on their phone.


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

RE: A good sign
PenguinPowered @ 7/25/2006 10:50:03 PM # Q
Is PIC's favorite Linux lizard going to be slithering around LinuxWorld next month?

dunno. wasn't planning on it, since i'd rather go to OLS (which is this week and I'm not making it, alas,) but I might see if my boss'll mind if i go up for a day.


May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: A good sign
hkklife @ 7/25/2006 10:50:10 PM # Q
I heard that Palm is going to introduce a mid-life update to their entire PDA line. They will incorporate a yellow-colored flashing charge LED along with new multi-threaded OS tweaks to honor Carl Yankowski. It's a golden opportunity to honor their string of innovations in this new millennium.

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

Navigating your Palm with nothing but brainwaves?

Gekko @ 7/25/2006 9:43:56 PM # Q

Surfing the Web with nothing but brainwaves
Kiss your keyboard goodbye: Soon we'll jack our brains directly into the Net - and that's just the beginning.
By Chris Taylor, Business 2.0 Magazine senior editor
July 24 2006: 11:33 AM EDT

SAN FRANCISCO (Business 2.0 Magazine) - -- Two years ago, a quadriplegic man started playing video games using his brain as a controller. That may just sound like fun and games for the unfortunate, but really, it spells the beginning of a radical change in how we interact with computers - and business will never be the same.

Someday, keyboards and computer mice will be remembered only as medieval-style torture devices for the wrists. All work - emails, spreadsheets, and Google searches - will be performed by mind control.

http://money.cnn.com/2006/07/21/technology/googlebrain0721.biz2/index.htm?cnn=yes



RE: Navigating your Palm with nothing but brainwaves?
e_tellurian @ 7/26/2006 4:15:46 AM # Q
If one wants too of course.

Our thoughts are already void of privacy hence the need/want for a secure we-com virtual wallet industry.

With brain waves floating about like sound waves how much more privacy will this offer?

Insider trading is illegal. If one can simply target an individuals mind then intellectual theft is a potential issue.

The equity of some intellectual property is greater than the entire value of some nations economies.

Do some really want to exchange ideas for their freedom?

E-T

e-tellurian

completing the e-com circle with a people driven we-com solution

RE: Navigating your Palm with nothing but brainwaves?
kaafree @ 7/26/2006 8:25:39 AM # Q
>>>Do some really want to exchange ideas for their freedom?

Some already do. Ever heard of GNU/free software ?

And generally speaking all the science is built on the free exchange of ideas. Where could we be if Sir Isaac Newton had his Falling Apple Law patented ?

Reply to this comment

I can't go. Always working.

VampireLestat @ 7/25/2006 10:40:41 PM # Q
I would love to go to that expo.

Would be nice to meet the geniuses behind the great Palm OS. :-D

Reply to this comment

WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?

SeldomVisitor @ 7/28/2006 4:05:53 PM # Q
From PALM's just-released annual report:

== "...Contemporaneously with the license agreement, we entered
== into a co-development agreement with PalmSource to develop a
== next-generation Palm OS for use in future Palm products.
== PalmSource did not timely meet certain of the milestones under
== the co-development agreement, relieving us of our obligation to
== make minimum royalty payments under the license agreement after
== calendar year 2006. We are presently in negotiations with
== PalmSource to expand our development and distribution rights to
== the current version of the Palm OS. If we are unable to
== successfully conclude these negotiations, it may adversely
== affect our ability to develop and distribute new products based
== on a next-generation version of the Palm OS. Regardless, we will
== continue to release new products based on the current version of
== the Palm OS..."

Bwahahaha!!! It's now hitting the fan, folks...
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/28/2006 4:15:55 PM # Q
Translation (courtesy of Babelfish's Mumbojumbo -> English translator):

Cobalt blew up in our faces and totally effed up the PalmOS market. We wanted Palm Linux (because Linuz sounds kewl). We lost out in "buying" PalmSource when the poison pill in the new contract failed to scare off Access. We want our OWN "PalmOS" and Access is letting the old PalmOS wither and die. We are going to have to play hardball with those dumba$$es at Access so we ca cherrypick the parts of PalmSource IP we need to create a Pal-branded "PalmLinux™".

This is a high stakes game of "chicken":

1) Palm is PalmSource/Access' only significant remaining licensee.
2) PalmOS is effectively now a lame duck OS.
3) Besides the income from Palm's license, PalmOS is otherwise more or less worthless to Access. (Don't let the last minute addition of PACE to Access' bizarre modular ALP-OS fool you - the only benefit of PACE is to lure PalmOS faithful into the clutches of ALP-OS, keeping the faithful sheep PalmOS devotees quiet while plans are quietly made to EOL PalmOS)
4) SOME money from for worthless IP is better than NO money if they were to jump to Windows Mobile exclusively. The only question is how hard can Access squeeze its Golden Goose before Goosey either croaks or flies away to the Windows Mobile pond.
5) Palm needs a proprietary OS to differentiate itself from other smartphone sellers.
6) Palm lacks the $$$ to compete mano a mano with the likes of Nokia et. al. (new phones every six months, etc.).
7) Palm cannot differentiate itself enough to survive as JAWL (Just Another WindowsMobile Licensee).
8) Between PACE, Cobalt and PalmLinux, there should (barely) be enough viable code to cobble together a simple, functional next-generation PalmOS.
9) The smartphone market could evaporate at ANY moment.
10) Palm has run out of time - the Grim Reaper (Sony Ericsson, Nokis, Motorola, LG, Samsung) has arrived.


These are interesting times, indeed.




TVoR

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
Foo Fighter @ 7/28/2006 5:13:36 PM # Q
I agree, but Palm isn't going to roll their own OS as many had hoped. The language of this report backs up what I said before..the Linux engineers Palm solicited were to be used for co-development with PalmSource on ALPO, not an in-house PalmOS replacement. I see them transitioning entirely to Windows Mobile by the end of next year. Palm has made it clear they intend to position themselves for the business market, less so for consumers. And they clearly see WinMob as the necessary platform to get them there.

Palm still has the ability to differentiate themselves from other WinMob licensees but they aren't executing well. Their problem is they simply cannot keep up with the pace of innovation from competitors, especially Motorola, Nokia and even HTC to a lesser extent. It's taking Palm an entire year to rollout just one product cycle. We're approaching the eleventh hour and the other half of the 700 series is just beginning to trickle out. Worse...that produce (their flagship product no less) is already obsolete. At a time when the Treo should be relegated to the bargain, it's carrying then entire company revenue stream. Suicide!

Had Palm managed to introduce a broader array of competitive smartphone offerings...even just one model that addressed the Moto Q (which Palm had more than a year of warning) as I originally anticipated, they would have had a good fighting chance. As it is now, I see no hope for Palm moving forward unless drastic changes are made to both their product roadmap and development/distribution process. They need to innovate and get the product in the pipeline faster instead of relying on a single device as a cash cow. Well this cow just ran out of milk, boys. You can stop pulling at her utters and it out to pasture!

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

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
SeldomVisitor @ 7/28/2006 5:20:04 PM # Q
Well, gee, I would have expected the "blow up" to have been reflected in recent PALM's hiring patterns...giggle.

Cobalt? I doubt that got furhter than that December delivery to meet the CEO's mistaken promise of delivery that year and nothing else.

RE: WHAT was that 'Ka-BLOOM' I just heard!!? Yup.
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/28/2006 5:38:22 PM # Q
Well, gee, I would have expected the "blow up" to have been reflected in recent PALM's hiring patterns...giggle.

;-O

Caution: Flying Feces™ ahead. This is gonna get ugly. I hear bad rumors about the Treo 700 followup device...

The 2006-07 Nokia, Sony Ericsson and Motorola lineups are the coup de grace for Palm. Palm needs a buyout saviour now. I'm hereby going on record as predicting an announcement from Palm this quarter that they have been bought. I won't say who the buyer is until closer to the blessed day. How does the grass grow out there in left field? Remember: the Matrix is the key. Will Neo get the answers he seeks from The Oracle? Stay tuned...

Cobalt? I doubt that got furhter than that December delivery to meet the CEO's mistaken promise of delivery that year and nothing else.

Despite my (mutually pleasurable) public flogging of Dianne "Dangergirl" Hackborn, Cobalt had more of a future than a strategy predicated on leeching a decaying FrankenPalmOS year after year. Ironically, had Palm pulled off the PalmSource buyout and released PalmLinux in 2007 they might still have gotten away with it. Damn "those meddling kids". Yoinks, Scooby!


TVoR

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
craigdts @ 7/28/2006 5:47:54 PM # Q
Read:

"We are presently in negotiations with PalmSource to expand our development and distribution rights to the current version of the Palm OS."

We want it so we can hook it up to our linux. It scares Access. They want us to stick with their palm linux plans and Garnet.

"If we are unable to successfully conclude these negotiations, it may adversely affect our ability to develop and distribute new products based on a next-generation version of the Palm OS."

We need development and distribution rights so we can include it in our version (next-gen version of Palm OS) of Palm OS. We want to buy it. I wonder how much R&D money palm has already sunk into this. I guess they always could go WM exclusively, add a symbian variant.

"Regardless, we will "continue to release new products based on the current version of the Palm OS..."

Worst case, we keep using garnet. We stick it in low end phones. We've done all the work on it.

The idea behind all of this was that Palm's license agreement allowed them to back out and develop their own OS if PSRC screwed up Palm Linux development. They backed out at first opportunity. Now they are trying to purchase or lease palmsource intellectual property in order to hook it up to their own Palm linux OS. Palmsource is not happy with that because Palm's will be better than theirs.

If Access refused to let palm have access to this, it will be very interesting.

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
cervezas @ 7/28/2006 5:51:24 PM # Q
link: http://investor.palm.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=1193125-06-155911


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

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
craigdts @ 7/28/2006 6:16:55 PM # Q
hmmm . . . should we expect activity in October '06?

"Our ability to utilize our net operating losses may be limited if we engage in transactions which bring cumulative change in ownership for Palm to 50% or more.
As a result of the acquisition of Handspring in October 2003, we experienced a change in our ownership of approximately 30%. If over a rolling three-year period, the cumulative change in our ownership exceeds 50%, our ability to utilize our net operating losses to offset future taxable income may be limited. This would limit the net operating loss available to offset taxable income each year following the cumulative change in our ownership over 50%. In the event the usage of these net operating losses is subject to limitation and we are profitable, our earnings and cash flows could be adversely impacted due to our increased tax liability."

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
Surur @ 7/28/2006 6:19:03 PM # Q

Seldonvisitor, thanks for the scoop. I'll credit you later.

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

missing the interesting point here, aren't we?
cervezas @ 7/28/2006 7:11:14 PM # Q
craigdts wrote:
should we expect activity in October '06?

I wouldn't make too much of the stuff about ownership change. They also had to spell out possible losses due to terrorist attacks. You can learn a lot about their plans from reading the other risk disclosures, though.

Like that they're saying they'll keep releasing new products based on the current version of Palm OS if current negotiations with ACCESS to expand their "development and distribution rights" go south.

And what's missing? They list terrorism as a risk. But not a word about any risks associated with ACCESS failing to deliver a successor to Palm OS in a satisfactory or timely manner.



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

nonsequitur followed by non-read-the-report
cervezas @ 7/28/2006 7:24:55 PM # Q
Foo Fighter wrote:
Palm isn't going to roll their own OS as many had hoped. The language of this report backs up what I said before..the Linux engineers Palm solicited were to be used for co-development with PalmSource on ALPO, not an in-house PalmOS replacement.

There's no language of the sort. There's language about hiring 130 new employees for R&D and increasing R&D expenditures by 51% over last year. But not a peep about what OS they are or are not working on.

I see them transitioning entirely to Windows Mobile.

I guess it was these parts that tipped you off, eh, Kent:

"We are presently in negotiations with PalmSource to expand our development and distribution rights to the current version of the Palm OS."

And "Regardless, we will continue to release new products based on the current version of the Palm OS."

Can't slip one by you, can they? Just yanking your chain a bit, old boy. You should read the report.


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

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
cervezas @ 7/28/2006 7:43:35 PM # Q
craigdts interpreted:

"We need development and distribution rights so we can include it in our version (next-gen version of Palm OS)"

I think that's exactly the right interpretation. Especially since there is no word about the risk of ALP failing to deliver but specific mention of the negotiation for development rights on Garnet.

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

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
freakout @ 7/28/2006 8:49:41 PM # Q
"The backlog of firm orders on our smartphone products was $120.6 million as of May 31, 2006, compared to $213.8 million as of May 31, 2005 and $86.0 million as of May 31, 2004."

Ouch. Doesn't that mean they've got 50 percent less orders this year than they did last year?

We are highly dependent on wireless carriers for the success of our smartphone products.

The success of our business strategy and our smartphone products is highly dependent on our ability to establish new relationships and build on our existing relationships with domestic and international wireless carriers. We cannot assure you that we will be successful in establishing new relationships, or maintaining or advancing existing relationships, with wireless carriers or that these wireless carriers will act in a manner that will promote the success of our smartphone products. Factors that are largely within the control of wireless carriers, but which are important to the success of our smartphone products, include:


*testing of our smartphone products on wireless carriers’ networks;

*quality and coverage area of wireless voice and data services offered by the wireless carriers;

*the degree to which wireless carriers facilitate the introduction of and actively market, advertise, promote, distribute and resell our smartphone products;

*the extent to which wireless carriers require specific hardware and software features on our smartphone products to be used on their networks;

*timely build out of advanced wireless carrier networks that enhance the user experience for data centric services through higher speed and “always on” functionality;


*contractual terms and conditions imposed on us by wireless carriers that, in some circumstances, could limit our ability to make similar products available through competitive carriers in some market segments;


*wireless carriers’ pricing requirements and subsidy programs; and pricing and other terms and conditions of voice and data rate plans that the wireless carriers offer for use with our smartphone products.

(emphasis mine)For example, flat data rate pricing plans offered by some wireless carriers may represent some risk to our relationship with such carriers. While flat data pricing helps customer adoption of the data services offered by carriers and therefore highlights the advantages of the data applications of our smartphone products, such plans may not allow our smartphones to contribute as much average revenue per user, or ARPU, to wireless carriers as when they are priced by usage, and therefore reduces our differentiation from other, non-data devices in the view of the carriers. In addition, if wireless carriers charge higher rates than consumers are willing to pay, the acceptance of our wireless solutions could be less than anticipated and our revenues and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Wireless carriers have substantial bargaining power as we enter into agreements with them. They may require contract terms that are difficult for us to satisfy and could result in higher costs to complete certification requirements and negatively impact our results of operations and financial condition. Moreover, we do not have agreements with some of the wireless carriers with whom we do business and, in some cases, the agreements may be with third-party distributors and may not pass through rights to us or provide us with recourse or contact with the carrier. The absence of agreements means that, with little or no notice, these wireless carriers could refuse to continue to purchase all or some of our products or change the terms under which they purchase our products. If these wireless carriers were to stop purchasing our products, we may be unable to replace the lost sales channel on a timely basis and our results of operations could be harmed.

Wireless carriers also significantly affect our ability to develop and launch products for use on their wireless networks. If we fail to address the needs of wireless carriers, identify new product and service opportunities or modify or improve our smartphone products in response to changes in technology, industry standards or wireless carrier requirements, our products could rapidly become less competitive or obsolete. If we fail to timely develop smartphone products that meet carrier product planning cycles or fail to deliver sufficient quantities of products in a timely manner to wireless carriers, those carriers may choose to emphasize similar products from our competitors and thereby reduce their focus on our products which would have a negative impact on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Carriers, who control most of the distribution and sale of, and virtually all of the access for, smartphone products could commoditize smartphones, thereby reducing the average selling prices and margins for our smartphone products which would have a negative impact on our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, if carriers move away from subsidizing the purchase of smartphone products, this could significantly reduce the sales or growth rate of sales of smartphone products. This could have an adverse impact on our business, revenues and results of operations.

That doesn't really sound like the kind of people you want your business dependent on, does it?

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

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
hkklife @ 7/28/2006 9:31:20 PM # Q
Some very telling info in that 10-K if you read between the lines...

When Palm signed those Faustian pacts with the carriers (Verizon, specifically) I knew that they were treading into areas where they had zero experience in the past. By prematurely bailing on the PDA market (again, Palm could have had the ENTIRE PDA for themselves had they come up with a few solid followups to the T3) Palm put themselves at the mercy of the carriers, exposing the Treo as not just a one-trick pony but as a broken-down old mule masquerading as a pony.

PDAs are hideously unglamorous devices and are in about the same position now as VCRs were 7-8 years ago--on the way out but still profitable and still with some manner of fandom. Palm could have used a small, tightly focused group of solid & continuously evolving PDAs as a profitable buffer to ride out the bumps in the smartphone market.

Innovative "guerilla" tactics could also serve Palm well in certain areas. Example: Cingular taking a pass on the new POS GSM Treo? Release it anyway as an unlocked, unbrandedGSM Treo, sell it on palm.com and at CompUSA (they already have a nice selection of unlocked GSM handsets) for a VERY competitive price (ie sell it at retail for the same as carriers' 2-year contract discounted price) and wreak havoc with the carriers' heavy handed pricing and miserly handset selection. Do this while the "Palm" and "Treo" brands/products still have SOME leverage/equity to them.

Finally, Palm should beg,threaten, or somehow coerce SlingMedia into releasing a POS version of the Slingbox client and make a gussied-up version of TCMP standard in the ROM of every new Palm Inc device.



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

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
PenguinPowered @ 7/28/2006 9:44:04 PM # Q
While Palm may be the only PalmOS licensee, they aren't even ACCESS' biggest customer.

If it comes to playing 'hardball', Palm doesn't have any balls to play with. Access doesn't need a quick cash infusion, so they're in a position to keep Palm over a licensing barrel, and appear to fully intend to. Palm, on the other hand, needs to keep licensing PalmSource IP, at least Garnet, for the next couple of years.



May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: WHAT was that SPLAT! I just heard!!?
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/28/2006 10:05:40 PM # Q
And what's missing? They list terrorism as a risk. But not a word about any risks associated with ACCESS failing to deliver a successor to Palm OS in a satisfactory or timely manner.

Now I wonder why that would be...


;-O

Colligan: Et tu, Beersy? Et tu?

Beersy: Giggle!

Got Colligan by the short & curlies
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/28/2006 10:24:38 PM # Q
"The backlog of firm orders on our smartphone products was $120.6 million as of May 31, 2006, compared to $213.8 million as of May 31, 2005 and $86.0 million as of May 31, 2004."

Ouch. Doesn't that mean they've got 50 percent less orders this year than they did last year?

Not quite. As I had pointed out a few weeks ago, Palm put a lot more Treos than were sold into the channels last quarter and this excess inventory will cause a drop in demand for the next 3 - 6 months. Unless a hot new Treo is released to spark interest the prediction for Palm for the remainder of 2006 is a whole lotta pain.

We are highly dependent on wireless carriers for the success of our smartphone products.

The success of our business strategy and our smartphone products is highly dependent on our ability to establish new relationships and build on our existing relationships with domestic and international wireless carriers. We cannot assure you that we will be successful in establishing new relationships, or maintaining or advancing existing relationships, with wireless carriers or that these wireless carriers will act in a manner that will promote the success of our smartphone products. Factors that are largely within the control of wireless carriers, but which are important to the success of our smartphone products, include:

[snip]A LOT OF VARIABLES PALM CANNOT CONTROL


That doesn't really sound like the kind of people you want your business dependent on, does it?

Palm has decided to serve a new master and has turned its back on consumers. While it may be easier dealing with a couple dozen carriers rather than a few million end users, failure to satisfy even ONE of Palm's bigger customers could be catastrophic. That the chance you take with the new carrier-centric business model. The carriers can both giveth and taketh away. If you look at the number of things that can potentially go wrong for Palm and consider how prevalent incompetence is within the organization it's diffifult to believe disaster won't soon strike. (Say, for example if Palm failed to get its next device ratified in a timely manner by a couple of US carriers...) Looking at how long it takes for Palm to create new (or even slightly upgraded) designs and how long it takes to roll out models, the Treos will all be FAR behind Palm's competitors in terms of technology, features and quality by 2007. And once passed, Palm will never catch up to the likes of Nokia et al. I hear Palm's next model is code-named Coriolis...

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
Foo Fighter @ 7/28/2006 10:31:27 PM # Q
>> "I guess it was these parts that tipped you off, eh, Kent:"

Uh.."current version" to me means Garnet. Now if you consider holding on to a dead OS for the next two to three years and commitment, then yeah...PalmOS is here to stay. If Garnet has any space in Palm's product matrix it is at the low-end.

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

Palm Vs PalmSource (Access): Smackdown in Sunnyvale?
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/28/2006 10:49:03 PM # Q
While Palm may be the only PalmOS licensee, they aren't even ACCESS' biggest customer.

I haven't seen a breakdown of Access' revenue stream (and the DoCoMo involvement no doubt even further muddies the waters) but Palm's licensing agreement called for some healthy payouts for what amounts to useless IP:

(From the May 2005 8K)

"The minimum annual royalty commitments for the contract years ending December 3, 2005 and 2006 remain unchanged from the Prior Agreement at $41.0 million and $42.5 million, respectively. The minimum annual royalty commitments under the extended term of the SARSLA for the contract years ending December 3, 2007, 2008 and 2009 are $35 million, $20 million and $10 million, respectively, subject to the Company meeting certain development milestones."

With PalmSource being sold, Palm can also exercise its options on PalmOS for $10 million/year for 2010 and 2011.

Is Access going to throw away easy money by calling Palm's bluff?

If it comes to playing 'hardball', Palm doesn't have any balls to play with. Access doesn't need a quick cash infusion, so they're in a position to keep Palm over a licensing barrel, and appear to fully intend to. Palm, on the other hand, needs to keep licensing PalmSource IP, at least Garnet, for the next couple of years.

StyleTap Platform raises some interesting issues. Would a version of Windows Mobile with a more advanced release of Styletap Platform (emulating PalmOS) be legal? If it is, Palm could fu*k Access, get out of its licensing agreement, throw its resources behind a single platform, achieve differentiation from other Windows Mobile licensees and retain legacy PalmOS customers - all in one fell swoop.

COLLIGAN: "This TVoR character is brilliant! Miss Jones - get me Legal on Line 2."


TVoR


In all seriousness, it's sad to see the way PalmOS has been desecrated by those ba$tards at Access.


Free PalmOS! Free PalmOS! Free PalmOS!

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
cervezas @ 7/28/2006 11:06:35 PM # Q
Foo Fighter wrote:
Uh.."current version" to me means Garnet.

And what about the "next-generation Palm OS" that Palm says they need a license from ACCESS to create?


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

The sound of one hand clapping? The Zen of Access, Grasshopper.
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/28/2006 11:23:13 PM # Q
Foo Fighter wrote:
>>>Uh.."current version" to me means Garnet.

And what about the "next-generation Palm OS" that Palm says they need a license from ACCESS to create?

Windows Mobile + clean sheet version of StyleTap Platform - PalmSource license = Hail Mary pass?

TVoR

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
PenguinPowered @ 7/28/2006 11:26:11 PM # Q
And what about the "next-generation Palm OS" that Palm says they need a license from ACCESS to create?

Palm PIMs on win/mob, anyone?



May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: Palm Vs PalmSource (Access): Smackdown in Sunnyvale?
PenguinPowered @ 7/28/2006 11:27:12 PM # Q
subject to the Company meeting certain development milestones.

PalmSource did not timely meet certain of the milestones under the co-development agreement, relieving us of our obligation to make minimum royalty payments under the license agreement after calendar year 2006.

Palm is not a very big revenue source for ACCESS these days, and, in my opinion, ACCESS fully expected PSRC to default on those milestones when they made the purchase.

As things now stand, Palm has a license for Garnet and earlier, on a per-unit basis, for five years. And no future in ACCESS' netfront based "platform" plans.



May You Live in Interesting Times

If Access won't deal, NOW is the time for Palm to move on.
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/28/2006 11:28:00 PM # Q
And what about the "next-generation Palm OS" that Palm says they need a license from ACCESS to create?

Palm PIMs on win/mob, anyone?

Windows Mobile + PalmOS-style PIM + StyleTap Platform + tabbed launcher + OS customizations (Wisbar, Resco apps, etc) = the safest, most pragmatic solution for Palm right now. (Assuming ripping off PACE is legal. If PACE emulation is not kosher Palm should simply give up on PalmOS ASAP and try to shine the feces known as Windows Mobile as best as they can. Any way you slice it, without control over PalmOS Palm is a dead company walking.)


That's what you get when you try to play clever little shell games with your most valuable asset (PalmOS). Good work, Benhamou.

TVoR

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
Surur @ 7/29/2006 4:47:36 AM # Q
As things now stand, Palm has a license for Garnet and earlier, on a per-unit basis, for five years. And no future in ACCESS' netfront based "platform" plans.

I'm sure many readers would be very reassured to have this confirmed. Is there any public documentation I can show as evidence?

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: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
SeldomVisitor @ 7/29/2006 7:57:30 AM # Q
> == "...The minimum annual royalty commitments under the extended
> == term of the SARSLA for the contract years ending December 3,
> == 2007, 2008 and 2009 are $35 million, $20 million and $10
> == million, respectively, subject to the Company meeting certain
> == development milestones..."
>
> ...
>
> Is Access going to throw away easy money by calling Palm's bluff?

Uh...not to point out the obvious but...the original post in this thread pointed out that Access did NOT meet those milestones and those $35/$20/$10 million yearly guarantees from December onward are no longer in place.

Thus Access HAS thrown away the easy money (*).

Now PALM is in negotiations to buy the whole shebang (er...PalmOS), probably. And, based off of nothing more than the obfuscatingly-written 10K, Access and Palm aren't seeing eye-to-eye on the cost.

Hey! Ya think that PSRC spinoff was a good idea?

Maybe PALM'll have the opportunity to do it again in a couple years!

Whatta game!

========

(*) It would be truly funny if Access purposefully didn't meet the milestones so they could sell PALM back the PalmOS at a take-it-or-die premium...giggle.

Business can be so cut-throat...


RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
SeldomVisitor @ 7/29/2006 8:24:23 AM # Q
>> ...As things now stand, Palm has a license for Garnet and
>> earlier, on a per-unit basis, for five years. And no future in
>> ACCESS' netfront based "platform" plans.
>
> I'm sure many readers would be very reassured to have this
> confirmed. Is there any public documentation I can show as
> evidence?

The 8K that covers the software license:

-- http://tinyurl.com/kurp7

lays out the entire terms of that license, including the ability for PALM to drop "minimum" royalties. However, that license allows PALM to buy Garnet up to December 2009, I believe. In particular, see about half-way thru the document to Exhibit D (page 3-ish of it).

Thus PALM can use it as TVoR noted.

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
Surur @ 7/29/2006 8:57:29 AM # Q

Thx.

Its a pity Exhibit D1 has been redacted. I would have loved to see what Palm considers a commercially-viable
implementation of operating system software that (i) [**], and (ii) provides features and functionality that are reasonably equivalent in all material respects to [**]
(would that be cobalt, garnet or WM between those brackets?)

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: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
craigdts @ 7/29/2006 9:16:07 AM # Q
So what is Palm looking at $80-100 million for Garnet? That sure would help access offset some of the costs for PSRC.

Maybe they can do it with stock/cash offer to access for the part of palmsource they want . . .

Maybe there's more to this 10K than we think:

What if Palm decided not to buy Palmsource because the change in ownership of stock would have put them over the 50% number in a 3 year period - making the purchase even more costly - they couldn't carry their losses forward.

Now as October '06 approaches perhaps Palm had a side deal with Access that allows them to buy back garnet and possibly some employees (employees not likely). The next few months will be interesting.

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
hkklife @ 7/29/2006 10:11:44 AM # Q
Well of course the next few months will be interesting! It IS said, after all, that we do live in interesting times indeed!

Pilot 1000-->Pilot 5000-->PalmPilot Pro-->IIIe-->Vx-->m505-->T|T-->T|T2-->T|C-->T|T3-->T|T5-->TX-->Treo 700P
RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
Surur @ 7/29/2006 10:12:47 AM # Q

As VOR would remind us, the real talent has left PSRC a long time ago.

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: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
PenguinPowered @ 7/29/2006 2:17:29 PM # Q
It would be truly funny if Access purposefully didn't meet the milestones so they could sell PALM back the PalmOS at a take-it-or-die premium...giggle.

It would be. They didn't do it on purpose. I don't think there is any action ACCESS could have taken to prevent it from happening.


May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
PenguinPowered @ 7/29/2006 2:30:46 PM # Q
If Access won't deal, NOW is the time for Palm to move on.

Access will deal. They're not going to walk away from the licensing revenue. They're just in the position of strength in this dealing.

They're the only player Palm can deal with on this, and they don't need anything back from Palm -- just money.



May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
cervezas @ 7/29/2006 3:24:03 PM # Q
We really don't have any idea when these "milestones" were missed. Could have been before the acquisition process began, before it was completed in December, or after the acquisition was complete. We also don't know that missing the milestones was the reason that Palm bailed--just that it was considered a sufficient legal pretext. My take is that the real reason is that Palm didn't feel comfortable relying on ACCESS's business plans, which presumably would include licensing ALP to some of Palm's competitors.

Interestingly, now that Palm isn't likely to license ALP it may be easier for ACCESS to license it to others since it becomes a diffentiation point. In the short term it could mean more Garnet-compatible devices coming to market. For a while anyway. I don't think Garnet compatibility will sell many handsets once most of the developers and users have transitioned over to new multi-tasking APIs, so I expect it to be sloughed off within a couple of years of the release of ALP--maybe a little later from Palm's new OS. Still, it will have served its purpose and it could put a bit of a damper on the "Palm OS is dead" drumbeat.

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

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
scstraus2 @ 7/29/2006 3:44:28 PM # Q
Palm has no programming skills. The current versions of frankengarnet and the apps they write are proof of that.

If palm doesn't deal, palm dies. Simple. I certainly won't buy anything else from them. I'm loyal to PalmSource, not Palm. Palm generally makes crap hardware and crap software. PalmOS is the only thing that is important to me. I'll buy it from anyone.

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/29/2006 6:04:45 PM # Q
Palm is not a very big revenue source for ACCESS these days, and, in my opinion, ACCESS fully expected PSRC to default on those milestones when they made the purchase.

As things now stand, Palm has a license for Garnet and earlier, on a per-unit basis, for five years. And no future in ACCESS' netfront based "platform" plans.

While Access has been mysteriously propped up with cash to (foolishly) burn, I doubt they would turn down a good offer for the PalmSource IP. This could SUBSTANTIALLY offset the damage from the bidding war they got suckered into.

>>>Is Access going to throw away easy money by calling Palm's bluff?

Uh...not to point out the obvious but...the original post in this thread pointed out that Access did NOT meet those milestones and those $35/$20/$10 million yearly guarantees from December onward are no longer in place.

While that contract dealt with specicic guaranteed payouts, Palm still can licence PalmOS 5 for another 5 years (2007, 08, 09, 10, 11). Furthermore, unless Palm has some creative leaders that planned for the disaster of losing PalmOS, Palm NEEDS PalmOS, so Access should easily be able to put the screws to Palm to negotiate a lucrative selloff/licensing agreement for PalmOS 5 + any useful pieces of Cobalt and PalmLinux.

Thus Access HAS thrown away the easy money (*).

No, they gave up a guaranteed payment because there was no way for them to meet the (impossible) development schedule. PalmSource already was failing to meet the goals before Access bought the company and we see now that Access obviously had no interest in continuing development of PalmOS. At the same time, Access knows Palm probably needs PalmOS for at least the next 2 years, so they can demand extortion prices from Palm for IP that no one else really wants.

Now PALM is in negotiations to buy the whole shebang (er...PalmOS), probably. And, based off of nothing more than the obfuscatingly-written 10K, Access and Palm aren't seeing eye-to-eye on the cost.

Kinda hard to see "eye to eye" when someone is humping you a$$, isn't it?

;-O

Hey! Ya think that PSRC spinoff was a good idea?

Ya think? As I've said over the years, the spinoff was a scam where Palm was trying to get a little too clever with the corporate games. In the end, this spinoff may be remembered as what killed Palm and the PalmOS platform. Thanks, Benhamou!

Maybe PALM'll have the opportunity to do it again in a couple years!

Unless Palm is bought out (and SOON) they won't be around to bid again for an obsolete OS in 2 years.

Whatta game!

Indeed. Corporate shell games have come back to haunt Palm.

========

(*) It would be truly funny if Access purposefully didn't meet the milestones so they could sell PALM back the PalmOS at a take-it-or-die premium...giggle.

PalmSource has been in disarray for years and there was no way Access/PalmSource could deliver on a promise of a functional next-generation OS - even if they wanted to. And since Access had no intention of continuing development of PalmOS as a standalone OS, the die was cast the day that Access won the bidding war for Palm. At that point Palm should have determined whether or not the PalmOS IP was for sale and immediately bought it from Access. Failing that, they should have put ALL of their resources into optimizing Windows Mobile.

I previously suggested the "Access as (PalmOS) hostage taker" theory to explain the insane price Access had paid.

http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111669

While Access obviously recognized PalmOS could be unloaded to Palm (or even Motorola) at a later date - perhaps even for a profit - the $325 million price still seems absurd (even considering the China Mobilesoft wildcard).

Business can be so cut-throat...

But Palm thought they were being SO clever with the PalmSource "spinoff", Palm name "sale", IPOs... Bwahahahah!

I would have loved to see what Palm considers a commercially-viable
implementation of operating system software that (i) [**], and (ii) provides features and functionality that are reasonably equivalent in all material respects to [**] (would that be cobalt, garnet or WM between those brackets?)

Multitasking OS i.e PalmLinux scavenged from Cobalt's rotting carcass.

So what is Palm looking at $80-100 million for Garnet? That sure would help access offset some of the costs for PSRC.

Access would be looking at demanding over $200 million for rights to PalmOS IP and to also allow themselves exclusive rights to use PACE in ALP-OS. If you factor in the cash they picked up from PalmSource during the deal they could be able to walk away with ownership of China MobileSoft FOR NOTHING. Bwahahaha!

Maybe they can do it with stock/cash offer to access for the part of palmsource they want . . .

Palm stock isn't worth the paper it's printed on. (Trust me.) This is one of the most easily manipulated stocks I've ever seen. (Precisely why Palm offered PalmSource a lot of Palm stock when they were trying to merge the companies.)

Maybe there's more to this 10K than we think:

What if Palm decided not to buy Palmsource because the change in ownership of stock would have put them over the 50% number in a 3 year period - making the purchase even more costly - they couldn't carry their losses forward.

Now as October '06 approaches perhaps Palm had a side deal with Access that allows them to buy back garnet and possibly some employees (employees not likely). The next few months will be interesting.

No, it's a lot simpler than that. Palm tried and failed to pull off a deal wherein they could regain control of PalmSource for next to nothing. Unfortunately, other companies were willing to outbid Palm. Access now has to try to tell how much they can parasitize their sickly host (Palm) without killing Palm + in the process losing out on its only opportunity to quickly offset the PalmSource purchase price.

By the way, as Surur indicated, PalmSource is bereft of codemonkey talent. Smart people don't stay at dying companies waiting for layoff notices. (I hope Marty Fouts and Ms. Hackborn don't take that as a compliment!) I'd estimate that the majority of their current codemonkeys are new hires (and with limited $k1LLz, too).

>>>It would be truly funny if Access purposefully didn't meet the milestones so they could sell PALM back the PalmOS at a take-it-or-die premium...giggle.

It would be. They didn't do it on purpose. I don't think there is any action ACCESS could have taken to prevent it from happening.

Indeed. PalmSource needed 2 years and had only 6 months.

>>>If Access won't deal, NOW is the time for Palm to move on.

Access will deal. They're not going to walk away from the licensing revenue. They're just in the position of strength in this dealing.

They're the only player Palm can deal with on this, and they don't need anything back from Palm -- just money.

I think if Palm was smart they would have come up with a Windows Mobile-based Doomsday Scenario. MUCH more realistic + easier to implement than creating its own OS. They would also be in a better bargaining position with PalmSource/Access - Palm could easily walk away, leaving Access with a big, steaming pile of useless FrankenPalmOS.

We really don't have any idea when these "milestones" were missed. Could have been before the acquisition process began, before it was completed in December, or after the acquisition was complete.

How about... ALL ALONG.

We also don't know that missing the milestones was the reason that Palm bailed--just that it was considered a sufficient legal pretext.

Continuing to make guaranteed payments to a company that is screwing you makes no sense, Beersy.

My take is that the real reason is that Palm didn't feel comfortable relying on ACCESS's business plans, which presumably would include licensing ALP to some of Palm's competitors.

No Beersy. Palm is pi$$ed because Access effectively killed off development of PalmOS, destroying the one feature that made Palm devices stand out from the other smartphone hordes.

Interestingly, now that Palm isn't likely to license ALP it may be easier for ACCESS to license it to others since it becomes a diffentiation point. In the short term it could mean more Garnet-compatible devices coming to market. For a while anyway. I don't think Garnet compatibility will sell many handsets once most of the developers and users have transitioned over to new multi-tasking APIs, so I expect it to be sloughed off within a couple of years of the release of ALP--maybe a little later from Palm's new OS. Still, it will have served its purpose and it could put a bit of a damper on the "Palm OS is dead" drumbeat.

It's funny to see how much your rose-colored glasses distort your perception of reality, Beersy. In BeersyWorld™ a nearly-empty glass is believed to be overflowing with nectar from the gods...

Palm has no programming skills.

True.

The current versions of frankengarnet and the apps they write are proof of that.

Not really.

If palm doesn't deal, palm dies. Simple.

Possibly. Of course they may survive a few other ways:

- Windows Mobile
- Proprietary in house Palm-developed OS
- Getting bought out/merging
- Continuing to license PalmOS + develop/hack it in-house for the next 5 years.
- Winning state lottery

(I'm betting on the latter scenario coming true.)

I certainly won't buy anything else from them. I'm loyal to PalmSource, not Palm. Palm generally makes crap hardware and crap software. PalmOS is the only thing that is important to me. I'll buy it from anyone.

Wake up, Bubba. PalmOS died the day PalmSource was bought by Access. And PalmSource is officially dead (most staff have left and the remaining shell has been renamed). If you like PalmOS, get down on your knees and pray for Palm, Sinner. Palm is the only company left that cares about PalmOS - if Palm dies, the only PalmOS devices you'll be seeing will be on eBay auctions.


TVoR

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
PenguinPowered @ 7/29/2006 6:29:02 PM # Q
We really don't have any idea when these "milestones" were missed. Could have been before the acquisition process began, before it was completed in December, or after the acquisition was complete.

You can tell from a careful reading of the documents that the milestones were missed after I left PalmSource in December. Had they been missed any earlier, Palm would have been able to skip the payouts for '06, as the contract year starts on 3 Dec.

I first predicted to PSRC management that they would be missed before the Access purchase was announced, and before I was aware that PalmSource was attempting to be purchased. I was not then, nor am I now, surprised that PSRC management did not act on that prediction -- I had only been with the company for six months, and they had no way of calibrating my judgement on schedule issues.

Access may or may not have been aware that PSRC was going to miss the milestones while they were negotiating, but, as far as I'm aware, they took no action that had any effect either way on PalmSource's ability to meet those milestones.



May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
freakout @ 7/29/2006 9:36:23 PM # Q
"Palm has no programming skills. The current versions of frankengarnet and the apps they write are proof of that."

I disagree. I think they've done a bang-up job on the Treo. Phone, Messaging and Media are all very well-done apps and never, ever crash. The one-handed nav hackjob is also very impressive. (Yes, I know it was Handspring's innovation, but since Palm own whatever's left of them...)

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

Marty Fouts, Code WARRIOR (and my hero). What a man!
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/29/2006 9:52:04 PM # Q
>>>We really don't have any idea when these "milestones" were missed. Could have been before the acquisition process began, before it was completed in December, or after the acquisition was complete.

You can tell from a careful reading of the documents that the milestones were missed after I left PalmSource in December.

I always knew you were carrying those PalmSource slackers on your broad shoulders, Marty.

Had they been missed any earlier, Palm would have been able to skip the payouts for '06, as the contract year starts on 3 Dec.

I first predicted to PSRC management that they would be missed before the Access purchase was announced, and before I was aware that PalmSource was attempting to be purchased. I was not then, nor am I now, surprised that PSRC management did not act on that prediction -- I had only been with the company for six months, and they had no way of calibrating my judgement on schedule issues.

Access may or may not have been aware that PSRC was going to miss the milestones while they were negotiating, but, as far as I'm aware, they took no action that had any effect either way on PalmSource's ability to meet those milestones.

Actually, PalmSource could have missed the milestones earlier and Palm may have made the 2006 payment anyway because they knew they would require more licenses in 2006 than are already covered by the guaranteed payout. 4 million licences/year x $10/license = around what Palm was going to pay anyway under the old agreement. They also may have kept the contract intact as a show of good faith to the company that they were trying to buy PalmOS from. This is all TOO insane.

TVoR

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
PenguinPowered @ 7/29/2006 10:31:17 PM # Q
Sorry, but I can't take credit for carrying the slackers.

I just did my bit to make Linux usable on various telephony platforms.

The contract, by the way, isn't invalidated by the milestone misses, only the requirement to pay the fees.



May You Live in Interesting Times

Are you worried that PalmSource will have you KILLED, Marty?
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/29/2006 11:16:21 PM # Q
Statements like this from you make the company look pretty bad:

"If and when [good engineering occurred at PalmSource], it was mostly by accident, and despite one engineering faction or another getting into another faction or another's face over significant differences in how to develop software."

"The binder and the driver model are both fundamental flaws in Cobalt. The process model isn't precisely the best engineering I've ever seen, either. Power management was clever but could have been significantly better. LFS was never finished, so there was no real replacement for NVFS. There was no attempt to deprecate the sram non-volatile model."

"Blame both [management and engineering for PalmSource's faqilure], there's plenty of blame to go around in this case.

I can't speak to Palm(One)'s problems at all. PalmSource, on the other hand had plenty, and engineering was among them."

http://www.palminfocenter.com/comments/8499/#120894

I wouldn't be surprised to hear you woke up with a horse's head beside you in bed this morning...

TVoR

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
PenguinPowered @ 7/30/2006 3:09:16 AM # Q
I wouldn't be surprised to hear you woke up with a horse's head beside you in bed this morning...

Given the track record, I'd suspect it'd be more likely a mouse than a horse, it'd be four years late, and then they'd cancel it to go work on an elephant.



May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
SeldomVisitor @ 7/30/2006 8:08:12 AM # Q
> ...Palm still can licence PalmOS 5 for another 5
> years (2007, 08, 09, 10, 11)...

It's too early in the AM for me to go traipsing thru a 10K (or that license 8K) but I believe the "5 year period" ends in December 2009.

But, not checking, don't bet on it...

No PalmSource Christmas card from Gassée to Marty this year!
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/30/2006 2:07:27 PM # Q
>>>I wouldn't be surprised to hear you woke up with a horse's head beside you in bed this morning...

Given the track record, I'd suspect it'd be more likely a mouse than a horse, it'd be four years late, and then they'd cancel it to go work on an elephant.

Now that was just plain mean.

;-O


RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
Gekko @ 7/30/2006 3:31:04 PM # Q

Marty's grumblings about the PSRC "talent" reminds me of Gil Amelio's grumblings about Apple in his very entertaining book -

On the Firing Line: My 500 Days at Apple

EXCERPT

http://www.landsnail.com/apple/local/gil.htm



Requiem for a flyweight
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 8/2/2006 1:26:20 PM # Q
> ...Palm still can licence PalmOS 5 for another 5
> years (2007, 08, 09, 10, 11)...

It's too early in the AM for me to go traipsing thru a 10K (or that license 8K) but I believe the "5 year period" ends in December 2009.

But, not checking, don't bet on it...

Read the SEC filings again, hengeem. Palm can pick up options for 2010 and 2011. This was part of the "poison pill" they CLEVERLY had inserted into the renegotiated PalmSource contract to discourage anyone from buying PalmSource. Unfortunately they never counted on a potential buyer (Access) wanting PalmSource for something OTHER than PalmOS and then promptly killing off Palm's cash cow (PalmOS). OOPS!!!


TVoR

RE: WHAT was that 'THUNK' I just heard!!?
SeldomVisitor @ 8/2/2006 4:37:50 PM # Q
> ...Read the SEC filings again, hengeem. Palm can pick up options
> for 2010 and 2011...

Yeah, I did and they did (albeit, no mention of actual dates was given, just "extend two years".


Reply to this comment

Palm shall pay to Xerox the cumulative sum of $22.5 MILLION

The_Voice_of_Reason @ 7/28/2006 6:33:29 PM # Q
PATENT LICENSE AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT


This Patent License and Settlement Agreement (“Agreement”), dated and effective as of June 28, 2006, is made and entered into in duplicate originals by and between PALM, INC. and XEROX CORPORATION

Article 4. – Payment

4.1 In full and final consideration for the rights, licenses, privileges, covenants, immunities and releases set forth in Article 3 hereof and the covenants not to assert and sue set forth in Article 5 hereof, and in reliance upon Xerox’s warranties and representations set forth in Article 2 hereof, and for other good and valuable consideration, Palm shall pay to Xerox the cumulative sum of Twenty Two Million Five Hundred Thousand dollars ($22,500,000.00), (“ Payment ”). The Payment shall be made on or before the Effective Date. The Payment shall be comprised of a Settlement Payment in the amount of Twelve Million dollars ($12,000,000.00) which the Parties agree and acknowledge relates to the Patent In Suit and releases related thereto, and a License and Covenant Payment in the sum of Ten Million Five Hundred Thousand dollars ($10,500,000.00) which the Parties acknowledge and agree is related to the license of the Licensed Patents other than the Patents In Suit and the covenant not to sue and assert set forth in Article 5 of this Agreement. No portion of such sums due Xerox under this Section 4.1 shall be refundable for any reason whatsoever absent a material breach of this Agreement by Xerox as determined by a court of competent jurisdiction.


Dismissal of Lawsuit . Within one (1) business day after receipt of the full Payment due under Section 4.1 by Palm, Xerox shall file with the United States


________________________________________________________________________

I hope Xerox at least used a little lube with Eddy C.

RE: Palm shall pay to Xerox the cumulative sum of $22.5 MILLION
hkklife @ 7/28/2006 9:46:44 PM # Q
You'd THINK Palm would try to recoup a few bucks of that princely sum by selling a $20 downloadable, fully licensed, legit and supported Graffiti 1 plug-in for all OS 5.2 & newer devices.

Xerox is rapidly becoming the new Atari. They're extending their lifespin by suing the pants off of everyone!:
"Longer Living Through Litigation!"


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

Reply to this comment
Start a New Comment Thread Top

Account

Register Register | Login Log in
user:
pass: