Guardian Article: Can Palm find a way to survive?

Palm Linux PhoneIn an intriguing article published by the UK's Guardian newspaper, Palm’s CEO, Ed Colligan, admits in an interview this week that “it will be 12 to 18 months” before a Palm smartphone running a Linux-based OS appears. This information, while slightly contradictory to earlier reports, is nevertheless a sign that all may not be well with Palm's in-house OS developmental efforts.

The guardian article, while offering little in the way of new information, does a solid job of providing a nutshell summary of the myriad of reasons leading to Palm’s current doldrums, such as the aging Garnet OS architecture, reduced revenue and consolidation in the PDA market, and the lack of differentiation amongst the Treo line in the face of increasingly fierce competition.

Ed Colligan recently admitted on the Palm Blog that the main reason behind Palm's cancellation of the Foleo was the cost and effort of a two-pronged effort to develop the Foleo and its OS alongside a smartphone-centric Linux platform. Yet the Guardian article goes one step further and offers the suggestion that perhaps even trying to develop one new Linux-based OS in-house is too much for Palm to bite off in its current state. Such OS development is resource intensive, and, as an analyst quoted in the article says, "more of a distraction from the path it should be taking."

The Guardian piece concludes with this final paragraph:

"The risk for Palm is that the company might end up put all its focus into owning a shiny new software infrastructure for its handsets, but lack the resources and attention to build the services that customers want."

Article 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 View Full Comment Thread


tryingtoquit @ 9/14/2007 2:48:03 PM # Q
Wow, strike three and the guy keeps his job. Maybe Elevation will pay me not to develop something. A post from this site directed me to the new HP pdas. The 201 looks like a super TX. That’s it for me. I’ll miss all you guys. Always such clever comments. Don’t forget to kill the light on your way out.

RE: Done
DCeight @ 9/14/2007 3:28:53 PM # Q
I think you've said it best. My whole PDA experience is with Palm beginning at the start with the 5000 and routinely upgrading with each advancement. I purchased the T3 and sat and waited for the opportunity to move to integrate my pda with my cell phone. I want a phone with wifi capabilities and I'm not interested in a thumb keyboard. I want Graffiti. If I could make calls from my T3 I'd be all set. So I will move on and leave the Palm OS behind. Sadly and the greater issue for Palm is, while I've minimized handheld purchases, I am an avid buyer of programs and applications and will now make purchases on a different operating system. That is where Palm's base will truly show signs of erosion as buyers leave and developers chase and follow them to another system. I have waited this long to move to another system because of my investment in these programs for the Palm OS. I do not foresee coming back when Palm finally releases a worthy product and duplicating my investment.

RE: Done
joeags @ 9/14/2007 3:36:34 PM # Q
*shakes head* Now if that isn't a wonderful thing. I just did a search of the HP site when I read about the HP PDA mentioned above, and HP is putting out TWO new PDA's according to their site (judging by the "coming soon" notation). For Palm to just IGNORE the pda market, which very well is shrinking, while HP throws out a couple incremental increase handhelds is plain stupid. Palm may be trying to force us into a treo, but I know I'm not the only one that carries a pay-as-you-go cell phone and has no desire for a Treo. Oh well, it's not like it's the only stupid thing that Palm is up to...

RE: Done
ExPalmUser2 @ 9/14/2007 7:16:18 PM # Q
I'm switching too! I'm waiting for the availability of HP 210 iPaq. And check their HP's website everyday even though I've subscribed to be notified! :P I downloaded Windows Mobile 5's emulator and found it a very pleasant environment. Multitasking so the ability to switch back and forth between programs (state intact), opening multiple tabs in IE, dozens of web-browsers available, Unicode font support, block-recognizer [Graffiti One] which is fast and accurate, add to it a 4" VGA screen, 600Mhz cpu and replacable battery of HP 210 iPaq.

I bought a Palm TX in replacement of a dead Palm T3 (dead battery) just because of 5 years worth of data that I have on my PDA. Notes, contacts, journal entries, time logs, expenses ... And now I have to find similar softwares, and ways to port the old data to the new OS. If the T3's battery wouldn't die I wouldn't even buy the TX and would switch to WM directly after the T3.

Microsoft had the vision, they started with a product with a solid core, then they changed it through years to suit the specifics of handheld devices. They showed they have management. The impression is that there is someone there who knows what he's doing, has the vision, and is a superb manager. Steady flow of newer versions, improved each time. So simply Microsoft offers a better product today and I don't see any reason to be willing to remain on Palm OS anymore. 12-18 months??? Sick and tired of this "new multi-tasking OS" thing. We've been hearing it for years. How many years they've been saying this by the way????? When there is this wonderful multi-tasking OS right now out there why should I wait for Palm?

By the way, what's the reason behind 'no replaceable' batteries on Palm TXs. Is it for keeping the cost down or forcing the customer to buy a new one when the battery is dead? My old Sony Clie SJ22 has relacable battery!!

RE: Done
mtt @ 9/14/2007 7:37:48 PM # Q
Never thought I'd see it. I was planning on being a PalmOS / Treo user forever, buying each new model as they upgraded.

Well my current 700p is only an upgrade from the 650 in RAM & data speed, in everything else it is a lagging malfunctioning downgrade. My 600 was mostly better then the 650, exept the low-res screen. No actual new funcionality has been added.

Palm truly hasn't created anything new in the last 4 YEARS. Now they say they will create a new OS, and release it in another YEAR AT BEST?

What do you think the Treo(r) brand is worth in bankruptcy liquidation?

Handspring Visor, Palm V, Treo 180, Treo 90, Treo 600, Treo 650, Treo 700p

RE: Done
freakout @ 9/14/2007 8:05:37 PM # Q
My 600 was mostly better then the 650, exept the low-res screen

And Bluetooth, improved camera software, the removable battery, and NVFS (contentious, I know, but I prefer a device that doesn't forget everything when the battery runs flat).

Yep, it was an incremental upgrade, but it was still definitely an upgrade.

RE: Done
LiveFaith @ 9/14/2007 9:03:26 PM # Q
Incremental upgrades don't really cut it for a 2-3 year span in the tech world. Maybe at GM?

Pat Horne
RE: Done
twrock @ 9/14/2007 10:17:35 PM # Q
4" VGA screen

Seriously, something to drool over. Have you compared the dimensions of that unit vs. the TX?
TX (via my micrometer) - 78 x 14 x 121 mm
iPAQ 210 - 76 x 16 x 126 mm

The HP is actually less wide and only slightly larger in the other two dimensions, but with a 4" screen! Again, just what we've been asking for: max screen in a minimal body.

The rest of the specs are fantastic as well: SD and CF slots, internal mic, 3.5mm headphone jack, mic in, two speakers, removable 2200mhz battery, BT 2.0, 802.11 b/g. Unless this thing costs an obscene amount of money, anyone wanting a higher end PDA has got to at least take a serious look at it.

So once again I'll repeat that if Palm is going to force me to a WinMob device, it won't be Palm branded.

Thinking about Vista? Think again:
Want an alternative? Try this: or

RE: Done
hkklife @ 9/14/2007 10:49:09 PM # Q
I'd LOVE to see release a slightly slimmed/thinned down 2nd generation version of this thing without the CF slot and with,say, 2GB of internal flash and just one speaker.

I agree exactly with what Ron is saying. I am about ready to throw this lagging, battery-sucking, Error 3000ing 700p against a wall! I still have my two TXs but after they go...well, if Palm is going to force me to a WinMob device, it'll probably be this one!

Does anyone know how WM6 handles BT DUN on cell phones? Is it as picky as Palm OS devices are? Do WM units play nicely with CDMA handsets?

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

RE: Done
hkklife @ 9/14/2007 10:50:51 PM # Q
Pair this thing with a solid Bluetooth keyboard and a tiny dumbphone and you have a REAL mobile manager!

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

RE: Done
twrock @ 9/14/2007 11:58:31 PM # Q
Kris, is that you that keeps wishing for a Palm V style device? If so, I'm with you on this one. I can live with just one SD slot (no CF), a smaller 3.5" 320x480 screen, and non-removable battery (and the rest of the iPAQ 210 features) if they can cram that all into a V body (black please, IBM c3 style). Smaller screen, removing the CF slot and extra space saved by no removable battery should give them enough room to get the rest in there. Oh, and I'd really like to have the return of a decent flip cover.

Thinking about Vista? Think again:
Want an alternative? Try this: or
RE: Done
hkklife @ 9/15/2007 12:06:38 AM # Q
Yup, that's me that claims the Palm V is right up there with the iconic all-time great designs in the history of electronics....the Palm V is right up there with the original Mac, the StarTac, the Gameboy, Sony Walkman etc. Of course, the Palm V is the iconic one but I feel the m500 actually perfected the design.

And I still give huge props to Handspring for the Visor Edge design. They probably spent a fraction of what Palm did (did Handspring do it in-house? I'm pretty sure the Edge was not done by Ideo) and other than the horrible stylus placement, fixed flip cover and lame mini-Springboard slot (that was the device that should've kicked off SD for Handspring) it was a superb piece in every way, surpassing the Palm V in several aspects.

Side by side review/pics of two classics, in case anyone's feeling nostalgic:

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

RE: Done
ExPalmUser2 @ 9/15/2007 1:10:53 AM # Q
Unless this thing costs an obscene amount of money ...

iPaq 210 is $450 according to And I also noticed something they changed the amount of RAM from 64MB to 128MB on their site!

max screen in a minimal body

Interesting that is my favorite design too! Like Acer n311. Man that was a god damn beautiful device!!!

RE: Done
Gekko @ 9/15/2007 6:51:18 AM # Q

ahhhhhh, 1999. those were the days...

life was so much simpler back then.

RE: Done
dirkmeissner @ 9/15/2007 10:11:06 PM # Q
Palm already lost me as a loyal customer. I owned 10 PDAs from Palm II to LiveDrive, but I recently found the device I expected for a couple of years from Palm. I bought a O2 XDA Orbit. Large screen and integrated GPS. I might update to the HTC Kaiser in a while because of the keyboard. Treo was never an option due to the screen size. I will miss the Palm OS, but I am getting used to the WM6.


RE: Done
ExPalmUser2 @ 9/16/2007 7:05:15 PM # Q
Treo was never an option due to the screen size

The screen size is so important for me too. That's why I'm a two piece PDA/cellphone type. HP's new series is a ray of hope. I really hope that classic PDAs don't die because they could be such useful devices. Or at least be replaced by phone/pda hybrids that have similar dimensions and screen size to PDAs. But the down side of the second alternative [phone-pdas] is the price.

RE: Done
BaalthazaaR @ 9/16/2007 9:10:25 PM # Q
yeah I'm a "two piece PDA/cellphone type" too... just wish that the phonelink crap had lived up to it's original promise.
RE: Done
twrock @ 9/16/2007 10:11:27 PM # Q
I'm actually surprised at how easily my TX paired with my Nokia 6233 and how seamlessly it works. SMS is always done from my TX since I can enter graffiti much more quickly than pecking on those tiny keys. YMMV.

Thinking about Vista? Think again:
Want an alternative? Try this: or
RE: Done
BaalthazaaR @ 9/16/2007 10:51:55 PM # Q
I'm actually surprised at how easily my TX paired with my Nokia 6233 and how seamlessly it works.

Who is your service provider?... I was in a hurry when my phone died after 6 years... I got a cheap Kyocera that won't connect. But then again I wasn't actively thinking about pairing it with my TX.

RE: Done
twrock @ 9/17/2007 1:31:10 AM # Q
Chung Hwa Telecom, though I doubt that helps you at all. :)

Thinking about Vista? Think again:
Want an alternative? Try this: or
RE: Done
BaalthazaaR @ 9/17/2007 10:31:42 AM # Q
I guess that explains your late night(by my clock) comments. I'm on the evil^H^H^H^HVerizon Network.
RE: Done
hkklife @ 9/17/2007 11:11:29 AM # Q

Without retreading old ground too much, here's the nutshell summary:

Early CDMA BT phones unofficially worked with older (T2, T3, T5) Palm devices for BT DUN. Then Palm disabled CDMA BT DUN functionality on the LifeDrive & TX (likely either at the request of Sprint & Verizon or b/c they wanted to act chummy with the large CDMA telcos).

Palm never officially supported CDMA BT DUN in the first place but they went out of their way to disable it in their final two non-smartphone releases with Bluetooth. Then Verizon changed (or disabled?) their CHAP authentication over BT to really break things for users of older POS handhelds. Again, I'm recalling all of this from memory since it doesn't do me any good to dwell on this matter anymore b/c it makes my blood boil.

Anyway, I think that this CHAP authentication change basically rendered WinMob handhelds & Wintel PCs still compatible but locked out Palm OS devices (based on inherent OS limitations). Some brave souls on Brighthand/HoFo modded their Verizon phones' firmware to bypass this authentication but that's something I've never felt comfortable doing with a work-issued handset.

So my guess is that Palm worked in partnership with the telcos to disable PDA BT DUN in favor of all parties selling higher-margin Treos with the accompanying overpriced data plans.

Now look where Palm's pillow talk with the carriers has got one but Sprint wanting to even look at a Garnet-based unit, increasingly fierce WinMob competition, the Fooleo dead in the water, and a practically moribund PDA line.

I said several years ago that Palm could have extended the useful lifespan of their handhelds by releasing a series of TX & T|C-style handhelds that could work fine as standalone devices or could work in tandem with *ANY* Bluetooth handset on the market, regardless of carrier. If the domestic telcos would adopt reasonable ($10/month for BT tethering for handhelds, $20 for laptops etc) pricing policies, then the folks who prefer two devices could be happy alongside the folks who like a single converged device.

What if Apple wants to begin installing BT in the Touch as a way of offering an "almost iPhone" for people who don't like AT&T's coverage and/or want or must carry a different cell phone? THAT might make the carriers wake up and pay attention!

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

RE: Done
BaalthazaaR @ 9/17/2007 10:56:29 PM # Q
I don't mind the history lesson... I found this site only two years ago.

Reply to this comment

Why don´t they focus on a Linux TX2?

iBjorn @ 9/14/2007 2:54:05 PM # Q
I´m not a software guy but wouldn´t it be much easier and faster to get a plain PDA to the market - just to test the new platform and to show that Palm actually can produce something?

To sort out the underpinings for a phone with multitasking, antennas, power management and so on must be 80% of the work with the new platform.

Please Palm, just give us a plain TX2, with your new OS and your PIM's

RE: Why don´t they focus on a Linux TX2?
hkklife @ 9/14/2007 3:45:53 PM # Q
Yes, a TX2 would make for a perfect testbed for the new OS. I am still stunned that Palm was really thinking that an entirely new category of product (subnotebook) was the best way to develop a new OS devoid of carrier interference. I'd assume the reasonable order of doing things would be: "Launch PLinux on PDAs, tweak it a bit more, release it on smartphones, then extend its capabilities a bit more and do a Foleo-style device".

Now, Palm's still gonna sell, what, a million or so PDAs this year consisting of three ancient carryover models? Just imagine what they could do if they had something with (gasp!) similar hardware and more robust software capabilities than the iPhone. Palm doesn't even need to knockoff the iPhone's styling as the classic Palm V/m500 formfactor would make the ideal candidate to modernize. Even a hodgepodge of a handful of new 3rd party apps + a few hundred carryover emulated Garnet apps would give Palm a huge advantage/selling point over the iPhone/iPod Touch.

Palm could offer two standard launchers--the "big button" finger-operated n00b mode (ala iPhone) or the "littie button" classic POS-style launcher intended for stylus and d-pad use. Palm could then play on Apple's lack of a removable media slot and target the device as a "digital camera picture viewer" and its ability to store "endless gigs of stuff" on a handful of 8/16/32GB SDHC cards. Stick an integrated mic and Bluetooth on there and market it as a VOIP handset w/ strong PMP & PIM capabilities. It's NOT that hard, guys. Apple gets the big stuff right but intentionally overlooks the little details. Palm misses the big points by a mail but still usually manages to nail the small details (holding the home button to get a quick launcher, the reset button on the back operated by stylus tip, the ring/vibrate switch on Treos etc).

I'm not a software guy either but if they used at least a reasonable amount of existing tooling/tech that they could carry over from the TX/Treo, and had reasonably realistic expectations going into it and sold only at Palm kiosks/stores/website, I'd think that Palm could at least break even with such a device. They'd certainly garner some good buzz and word of mouth and keep their name in the borrow an alalogy from the PC industry, cards like the 8400s and X2400s are the bread and butter video cards for Nvidia & ATI. But the cards they get all of the gamerz buzzing are the X2900XT and 8800GTX high-end stuff.

If I were Colligan, I'd rather break even on a low-margin next-gen PDA that netted Palm a positive buzz instead of sinking 10 Mil. + on the Fooleo flop and tarnishing Palm's reputation in the process.

Besides, once a PDA design is done, it's "done" and (as the T|E2 shows) can be kept alive & kicking for years since the retail channel (especially direct sales) isn't in as much of a hurry to put the old models out to pasture like the carriers are.

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

RE: Why don´t they focus on a Linux TX2?
SeldomVisitor @ 9/14/2007 4:12:17 PM # Q
Perhaps PALM is thinking of doing all that has been discussed about "just release a PDA ya Dummies!".

I refer all a-GAIN to the words that Andy Brown said about rethinking.

Will they even be around in 12 - 18 months?
jca666us @ 9/14/2007 4:19:13 PM # Q
That's such a long time - once Palm is dead, who might buy up their scraps?

In 18 months, they might be cheap enough that freakout can purchase them! :)

RE: Will they even be around in 12 - 18 months?
LiveFaith @ 9/14/2007 5:43:52 PM # Q
Will they even be around in 12 - 18 months?

This is getting so old that even old faithfuls have got to be preparing to bail. This is the same song and dance that we heard back in 2004 with Cobalt. Still, we have almost nothing compelling beyond what was created at Palm in 2003. As someone said before, if I only had call, WiFi, and 3G on my 2003 model TT3, then I would be in high cotton.

We have been begging for this forever, and we still get 12-18 months. Ladies and gentlemen, I'm gonna step out on a limb on this one. Palm-Linux by Palm Inc will NEVER see the light of day. It's vaporware. Palm may be a vaporCo soon too. They tried unsuccessfully to sell it earlier this year and nobody wanted the albatross. I think if I were Motorola, I would swoop in and buy this thing for pennies on the $, just to try to wring something outta the Treo name and the marketing channels.

This "12-18" month statement is the last straw for me. My 680 is sooo awesome and just needs some updating. But, I think the party is over. These people have basically milked this thing into certain death. I feel sad.

Pat Horne

RE: Why don´t they focus on a Linux TX2?
SeldomVisitor @ 9/14/2007 5:56:28 PM # Q
I would assume that PALM, having thrown up their hands in disgust and dumped the Fooleo's Linux for Windriver's, has gone to Windriver for their phone Linux, too.

They have no problem completely outsourcing Windows now (note the distinctly nonPALM TREO 500v), why should they have a problem outsourcing Linux?

I think it'll just take awhile to get that Linux in shape and accepted by the previously-mentioned carriers.

RE: Why don´t they focus on a Linux TX2?
freakout @ 9/14/2007 7:39:06 PM # Q
Ladies and gentlemen, I'm gonna step out on a limb on this one. Palm-Linux by Palm Inc will NEVER see the light of day. It's vaporware.

I disagree on this one. I think it's different from the Cobalt debacle. Cobalt never saw the light of day in large part because of the ridiculous corporate games that Palm/Source were playing at the time. There was different leadership, different engineers, different priorities. I refer everyone to the interview Hawkins gave back in March this year:

Jeff Hawkins: OK, let’s put this in perspective. First of all, Palm, in my mind, is in the best shape it’s been in, in a long, long time. It’s amazing this company is still around. It was split up, the founders were kicked out, and they sold off the operating system. It’s nothing that I or Ed or Donna had anything to do with; but, this company has been operated in…many different ways.

Now, look at Palm today: we have Ed, practically a founder, running the business. Donna (Dubinsky) is on the board, and I’m still involved. We have our name back. We just bought the rights back to Palm OS from ACCESS; so we now have control of the Operating System again. One of the main reasons we did a Windows-based product is because we were worried we wouldn’t have access to the Palm OS. Palm is in complete control of its destiny again.

PJA: I think releasing WinMo devices was a smart move, in any case.

JEFF: It probably was; but here’s the thing: we didn’t have control of our own destiny for the past 5 years. We didn’t have our name, we didn’t have our brand, and we own our OS. We were struggling to get into the smartphone space, while we were losing our traditional distribution channels. It was a difficult time. While all this was going on, Palm kept growing; and, is still growing rapidly. Although there are lots of competitors, Palm is a very healthy company. We’ve been profitable for many consecutive quarters, years really; and, we’re making lots of money; and, we finally feel like we have control of our destiny back in our hands again.

Now, it takes a little but of time to turn that into products. It takes 2 years to design new products, and so you don’t see this control reflected immediately in the product line. In my view, this is a good time at Palm. In terms of viability, we have lots of cash, we’re profitable, and we’re in control of our own destiny. We haven’t been in this kind of shape in a long, long time.

I would assume that PALM, having thrown up their hands in disgust and dumped the Fooleo's Linux for Windriver's

How many times, SV, must we go over this? Palm were making a planned transition from Intel's 2.4 linux kernel to Windriver's 2.6 kernel. Unless you seriously suggest they should have stuck with outdated tech forever?

I apologise for any and all emoticons that appear in my posts. You may shoot them on sight.
Treo 270 ---> Treo 650 ---> Crimson Treo 680

RE: Why don´t they focus on a Linux TX2?
SeldomVisitor @ 9/14/2007 7:51:33 PM # Q
Kid, trust me.

You don't make a "planned transition" from one version of an operating system largely rewritten by one entity to another version of an operating system rewritten by another distinct entity a mere month before shipping your product.


As you say "Give it up.".

RE: Why don´t they focus on a Linux TX2?
jca666us @ 9/14/2007 7:57:53 PM # Q
anything Hawkins says is suspect - wasn't he the one who spoke at length about what an innovative and groundbreaking product foleo was? Case closed!

RE: Why don´t they focus on a Linux TX2?
freakout @ 9/14/2007 7:59:38 PM # Q
^^ But you're not answering the question, SV. Are you suggesting they should have stuck with Linux 2.4 forever?

Not that I'd argue the point that Palm severely bungled the Foleo OS - just that describing the switch to WindRiver's platform as "dumping" their prior Linux work is melodramatic at best. It would have had to have happened sooner or later anyways. The fact that it happened a month before shipping the product is more indicative of severe mismanagement than it is a lack of confidence in their own coding talent.

RE: Why don´t they focus on a Linux TX2?
SeldomVisitor @ 9/14/2007 8:19:06 PM # Q
> ...Are you suggesting they should have stuck with Linux 2.4 forever?...

My statement was:

== "PALM threw up their hands in disgust and dumped their own
== modified version of Linux and decided to go with WindRiver's instead"

The context of that statement ORIGINALLY was the a-STOUND-ing news that PALM had ... well ... dumped years of development ONE MONTH BEFORE they were supposed to ship THE NEXT GREAT THING and that "over the coming months" were going to be releasing WindRiver's version instead. That was an a-MAZ-ing self-condemnation of their own Fooleo Linux development. It doesn't MATTER what gimmicks (*) the existing Fooleo Linux had, it is READILY apparent that the overall system was broken - badly.

Ever since then, I've used that same statement as context for other comments but it and the reason for it has pretty much remained unchanged.

In no way does that statement say ANYTHING about NOT =eventually= moving on to other versions of Linux.


(*) Yes, gimmicks. "Instant on"...but "instant on" only if your application has been specially programmed to be instant on otherwise instant on doesn't work. Ill-defined "auto-sync"...but "auto sync" only if there is a special client running on the phone as well as on the Fooleo and your phone application knows about that client. A menu system that purportedly is ONE level deep (admittedly, I've seen only ONE post elsewhere about this but it was from someone who went to a Fooleo hands-on who also is (was?) a PALM fanboy so I believe it...YMMV).

RE: Why don´t they focus on a Linux TX2?
LiveFaith @ 9/14/2007 9:42:13 PM # Q
** indicative of severe mismanagement **

Nuff' said.

Pat Horne

Reply to this comment


michael.graff @ 9/14/2007 4:30:09 PM # Q
I think the 12-18 month quote was a reference to Jon Rubinstein's influence, not the timeframe for the next OS to show up in a product.

RE: Misquote?
LiveFaith @ 9/14/2007 6:35:12 PM # Q
Quoted directly from the article ...
"The bulk of Palm's software development spending is thus now aimed squarely at revamping Palm OS5 to work on a Linux core. But even that may be slipping: though earlier Colligan said that would appear in 2008, Palm this week told the Guardian "it will be 12 to 18 months" before a Linux Palm appears."

... could you please point to the portion that you are referring to concerning Mr. Rubenstein? I can't see it.

Pat Horne

RE: Misquote?
michael.graff @ 9/14/2007 6:41:55 PM # Q
The Rubinstein timeframe was in different articles. For example:

“Q: When will we see the first fruits of the Elevation deal?

“A: We haven’t been sitting on our hands. . . . We’re continuing to execute on our future products.

“Realistically, Jon’s direct involvement, you’re not going to see the fruits of that for 18 months.”

In the Guardian article, notice which words are direct Colligan quotes and which are the Guardian's words. It wouldn't be hard to get the details mixed up.

RE: Misquote?
LiveFaith @ 9/14/2007 7:04:02 PM # Q
**It wouldn't be hard to get the details mixed up.**

No doubt. They rarely get things right. But, they did put quotations around that statement claiming that "Palm" said it. Maybe not Ed, but somebody representing "Palm".

So, I guess a possible mixup is what you are referring to.

Pat Horne

RE: Misquote?
michael.graff @ 9/14/2007 7:41:29 PM # Q
The only direct quote in that paragraph is "it will be 12 to 18 months". The rest of the paragraph is the Guardian's rewording of what they think they heard. We can only hope that the quote is in context and the rewording is accurately paraphrased from the original.

Reply to this comment
Start a New Comment Thread Top View Full Comment Thread
Achtung! Only the first 50 comments are displayed within the article.
    Click here for the full story discussion page...


Register Register | Login Log in