MobileInfocenter

Motorola Also Bid For PalmSource

The Chicago Sun-Times is reporting that Motorola was also interested in purchasing PalmSource. Motorola claims PalmSource had accepted their offer and has asked a judge to award them a $8.7 million dollar breakup fee.

Motorola is claiming that PalmSource reneged on a $17.25 per-share buyout offer on Sept. 7th. They claim PalmSource directors accepted Motorola's offer, only to agree two days later to the $18.50 per-share offer from Access.

Palm also attempted to buy PalmSource but was outbid.

''PalmSource was obligated to pay Motorola the termination fee of $8,697,595 on or before Sept. 16, 2005,'' but failed to do so, Motorola said in court papers.

Thanks to PalmAddict for the tip.

Article Comments

 (119 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

Is this to the good or bad?

sr4 @ 10/5/2005 5:32:59 PM # Q

Moto would have given POS much more exposure, but would not have licensed it to third parties after its obligations ended. So is Access actually a better home for POS, or would it have been better if Moto won?

Surur

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
cervezas @ 10/5/2005 5:36:26 PM # Q
Are you kidding? It's FAR better for the Palm OS that ACCESS won. Had Moto won, Palm would have been dependent on a direct competitor for the Palm OS, as would LG, GSPDA and any other phone vendor that wanted to license Palm OS. Many, maybe even Palm, would likely have bailed.

It's much, much better if Moto simply licenses Palm OS. All the exposure without throwing ice-water on the rest of the Palm economy.

Yeah, yeah... "What rest of the Palm economy?"

Wait and see. ;)

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

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
LiveFaith @ 10/5/2005 5:36:46 PM # Q
Palm had to have freaked upon hearing that possibility. Direct competitor of your cashcow owning your OS does not make a binnessman happy.

Ohhhhh, but a RAZR Plinux Treo killer wooda been a beautiful thang!

Pat Horne; www.churchoflivingfaith.com

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
cervezas @ 10/5/2005 5:47:41 PM # Q
LiveFaith wrote:
Ohhhhh, but a RAZR Plinux Treo killer wooda been a beautiful thang!

Whaddaya mean "wooda", Pat? This is where you're supposed to show us the pictures you snuck out of the lab or clipped from some electronics catalog you found blowing across the Gobi Desert. You slippin' man?

But seriously, why NOT a Plinux RAZR? Just because Moto doesn't own PalmSource doesn't mean they can't license the OS. In fact the news that Company A is Moto (not Nokia) is very good because Moto's bid is a pretty unmistakable sign they are interested in using Palm Linux on future devices.

They'll be a licensee, mark my word.

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

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
sr4 @ 10/5/2005 5:58:41 PM # Q
POS needs the resuscitation NOW, not some time in the next 18-24 months. Being bought by Access has actually damaged the credibility of the platform, while being bought by Moto would have given it a huge amount of credibility.

Surur

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
cervezas @ 10/5/2005 6:09:17 PM # Q
POS needs the resuscitation NOW, not some time in the next 18-24 months. Being bought by Access has actually damaged the credibility of the platform, while being bought by Moto would have given it a huge amount of credibility.

Nah. The damage to credibility has more to do with PalmSource being that much more removed from Palm now. But anyone who knows ACCESS's business says the merger is a great fit and should open a lot of doors for the Palm OS. An acquisition by Moto would have slammed those same doors shut. And we wouldn't have seen Moto phones with Palm OS

The real credibility issue is whether PalmSource delivers on Palm Linux. And some people think they would not have been able to do that without an infusion of cash such as the one they're getting from ACCESS.



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

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
cervezas @ 10/5/2005 6:49:23 PM # Q
Oops... hit the submit button too early. The last sentence of the first paragraph should have been:

And we wouldn't have seen Moto phones with Palm OS for 15-18 months whether or not Moto had been the acquiring company.

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

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
sr4 @ 10/5/2005 6:54:07 PM # Q

Thats my point really. Being owned by Moto would have sustained the profile of the OS even during the long wait for POSLinux. Instead we get many many articles in many major publications saying POS is dead. This has major implications for sale of POS devices, especially to business, and will also not help OEM/ODM's decide to design for POS.

Surur

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
Sam H @ 10/5/2005 7:03:33 PM # Q
Moto's bid is a pretty unmistakable sign they are interested in using Palm Linux on future devices.

They'll be a licensee, mark my word.

OK, I'll bite.

Motorala will not license PalmOS-for-Linux.

Motorola wants its own user interface for its Linux-based smartphone OS, something that is unique to Motorola phones. That's why they developed their current UI in-house instead of licensing Qtopia, even though they licensed Qt/e to build it on. Buying PalmSource (and terminating Palm, LG and GSPDA's Customer Technology Briefings) would have given them that. Licensing PalmOS obviously won't.

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
cervezas @ 10/5/2005 7:11:08 PM # Q
Surer wrote:
...will also not help OEM/ODM's decide to design for POS.

You're not getting my point. A Moto acquisition most definitely would have helped OEM/ODM's to decide about this, but the decision would have been NO THANK YOU. Palm OS would become just an in-house toolkit for a company best known for its drab hardware and uninspired leadership.

Look, I realize that the buzz is all negative right now and that's not good. But most of that buzz has nothing to do with the acquisition (which the analysts liked) and everything to do with Palm announcing a Windows Mobile Treo.

Being bought by a company that your mother has heard of might have been a comfort to your mother (if she's a Palm user). But I think a Moto buyout would have caused a lot more "end of Palm" doomsaying from knowledgeable sources than we heard after the ACCESS news. Let's face it, Motorola doesn't have a great reputation when it comes to their own phones, and do you think they'd lift a finger to help Palm deliver a future Treo? Why would they?

Even if I accepted that everyone would have been reassured by a Moto buyout, it seems to me that an announcement by Motorola that they are becoming a licensee would have the same effect. And that's what should happen now.



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

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
joeags @ 10/5/2005 7:48:10 PM # Q
I've gotta agree with beer's comments here. The Palm OS, or whatever it will be called in the future, will only have Palm as the major producer on the hardware side for the next year for sure, and I'm sure they will lose more market share. But this acquisition is a marathon, not a sprint.

What's going to matter most is what PLinux is when it comes out. And in that court, the Treo 7xx version around that time will be a perfect answer to this question, because you will be able to compare Microsoft's and Access' version on pretty much identical hardware. If the performance is better, and the development community is behind this (which I'm sure it will be, as where there's money, there's developers!), there will be more manufacturer's stepping up to the PLinux hardware. Dell had a major spat with Palm, but has said in the right situation, they would be open to producing handhelds with Palm OS. And I'm sure the phone manufacturer's would go the same direction, as this OS is being developed directly for smartphone usage, as far as I understand it.

I think the best part about knowing that Motorola was a bidder is that PLinux is looking pretty decent. No company would have purchased PalmSource without looking at it's assets, and it's major asset now is the potential of PLinux. It was enough to make Moto want to pay a 50% premium.

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
Sam H @ 10/5/2005 7:51:51 PM # Q
And that's what should happen now.

Should? But you were so confident 20 minutes ago:

They'll be a licensee, mark my word.

Whatever happened? Did my little dose of reality unsettle you?

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
sr4 @ 10/5/2005 8:00:09 PM # Q
I accept that the biggest problem with Moto as the owner of Palm is that they are a hardware vendor, not software, and that they may then kill of all the other licensees. On the other hand, if only Moto made POS devices (like Palm does now) would that have been such a bad outcome (considering that Moto is a large resurgent company with lots of resources).

Surur

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
Sam H @ 10/5/2005 8:07:19 PM # Q
It might not have been so bad. Moto might have produced an Internet Tablet/PDA running PalmLinux in addition to smartphones.

But Moto don't seem too sure which direction they're taking. First they were part of the Symbain group. Then they broke with them and created MotoLinux. Now they have a WM5 phone due by Christmas. I suspect there's some internal conflict within Motorola over which OS to go with. A PalmSource subsidiary might not have prospered.

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
svrontis @ 10/5/2005 9:15:59 PM # Q
> Palm OS would become just an in-house toolkit for a company best known for its drab hardware and uninspired leadership.

Not sure if I agree with that last point. Motorola is often held up as a company which has excellent leadership. Most MBA schools do intensive case studies of how Motorola has reinvented itself over the years and they are regarded as a model of how companies should respond to the changing marketplace.

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
Timothy Rapson @ 10/5/2005 9:27:13 PM # Q
Motorola owning PSCS might have been about like Sony buying PSCS. Motorola makes some swell hardware. They have their own ARM chips. They do it all.
If Sony had purchased PSCS, PalmOne would have had to keep working on decent hardware as they did on the T3 and TE. Now, they can deliver whatever crap they want in the $100-300 range with absolutely no competition.
...

...

Until DoCoMo/Access delivers a phone that kills PalmOne, at least in Asia. Yes, I am now convinced that the real money behind Access's bid is DoCoMo. I suspect DoCoMo has the money for this that Access clearly doesn't have. I still think it a poor buy for them, but at least I could see Access thinking that with DoCoMo backing they could create something worth all that money.


I would rather have seen what Motorola could have done with complete control of both hardware and software in a PDA or a PDA/phone. Guess we'll never know.

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
cervezas @ 10/5/2005 9:28:57 PM # Q
And that's what should happen now.

Should? But you were so confident 20 minutes ago:

They'll be a licensee, mark my word.

Whatever happened? Did my little dose of reality unsettle you?

:)

Sorry, by mistake I answered in the other thread below:
http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8129#113329

Perhaps I'll regret you "marking my word" as I requested you to. But for the reasons I just explained in the other thread, I stand by my statement that it makes a lot of sense for Moto to be a licensee now that they can't own the Palm OS.



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

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
cervezas @ 10/5/2005 9:39:10 PM # Q
...Until DoCoMo/Access delivers a phone that kills PalmOne, at least in Asia. Yes, I am now convinced that the real money behind Access's bid is DoCoMo.

Welcome to the club. I had the same a-ha experience when I saw DoCoMo's large stake in ACCESS.

The next thing to do to start getting a picture of what that means is go out to http://www.nttdocomo.com and click the link for the Handset Gallery. (Don't bother if you don't have broadband.) Drop dead gorgeous phones with everything you could ever ask for in them. Why don't we get stuff like that here, dammit?


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

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
cervezas @ 10/5/2005 10:07:18 PM # Q
Motorola is often held up as a company which has excellent leadership. Most MBA schools do intensive case studies of how Motorola has reinvented itself over the years and they are regarded as a model of how companies should respond to the changing marketplace.

Maybe they should go back and study some of those old case studies themselves. I don't know, I'm not a big Moto-watcher and it's true things seem to have improved since Zander came in, but they've definitely been playing a catch-up game when it comes to the whole concept of converged devices. The RAZR is nice looking but otherwise weak, and what's up with the ROKR? How long does it take to figure out how to make a button that launches iTunes?

Personally, for my own twisted reasons, I kind of like some of their primitive IDEN phones (the ones that Nextel uses) because despite the tiny monochrome screens and weak MIDP APIs they have great little programmable GPS receivers and they're very rugged. That (and the low price) makes them good for some of my business customers. Why you can get a GPS receiver in a $49 Nextel phone but they're not available (much less standard) in ones costing 10 times that I will never understand.

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

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
hkklife @ 10/5/2005 11:14:17 PM # Q
David, what exactly does the GPS receiver in Nextel's phones do? Location-based services and/or helping "find" the customer on the radio network? Or it it just for E911 purposes?

Sad to say I've spent scarce time around contractors etc. and most of them aren't up for talkin' 'bout their phones anyway. I know they are amazingly rugged and have quit a loyal following.

You may recall that I've been pleading for SOMEONE to make a larger (say, LD-sized) ruggedized dual wireless Palm device. Think of it as a hybrid Symbol/Panasonic Toughbook device but a handheld. Add a CF slot to it and it'd have tons of potential in vertical applications, industrial stile applications, nascent RFID projects etc etc!

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
hkklife @ 10/5/2005 11:18:15 PM # Q
BTW, the ROKR is basically Moto's version of the LifeDrive (in SPIRIT, not in form). Moto needed something QUICK that could jump on the iPod/iTunes bandwagon before it lost momentum. They just slapped iTunes onto it and threw some marketing buzz/$ at it. Big deal.

The Razr is nice but has very 2004 specs. Look for the imminent VZW CDMA Razr "1.5" to add EVDO and a 1mp camera before the REAL RAZR 2 for GSM arrives sometime next year and ups the ante significantly.

If the LD is analogous to Moto's ROKR, then the RAZR is analogous to the Palm V. It's simply redefined Moto in a way not seen since the original StarTac in '96ish. I lusted after a 'Tac for years but it wasn't until '00 that they became really affordable. How often in the tech world do you see a device that remains basically unchanged design-wise but remains fairly desirable up through it's discontinued and EOL? No, the V60 series doesn't count (close but not quite).

Why don't we get "stuff like that here"? Thank the FCC and the relative insignificance of GSM in this country. With the territory that must be covered (you ever been out in rural Nevada or Arizona? You're blessedly lucky to get an analog signal!) GSM will never be a primetime player.

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
cervezas @ 10/5/2005 11:33:22 PM # Q
hkklife wrote:
David, what exactly does the GPS receiver in Nextel's phones do? Location-based services and/or helping "find" the customer on the radio network? Or it it just for E911 purposes?

Full-fledged location based services. For example, we've written a couple of apps for the trucking industry that track the position of all the drivers in a fleet, post it wirelessly to a server and then display the data in a web-based mapping application. GPS and wireless are a killer combination.

You may recall that I've been pleading for SOMEONE to make a larger (say, LD-sized) ruggedized dual wireless Palm device. Think of it as a hybrid Symbol/Panasonic Toughbook device but a handheld. Add a CF slot to it and it'd have tons of potential in vertical applications, industrial stile applications, nascent RFID projects etc etc!

Yeah, that would be great. There are a lot of devices like this that run flavors of WinCE and some Linux ones, too, but nothing quite like it on Palm OS. Aceeca's ultra-ruggedized Palms have some promise (despite the old OS) if only there were more plug-in modules that did stuff like you're describing. But you're talking about something with a bigger, higher-res screen, and WAN+WLAN, which would be killer.

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

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
cervezas @ 10/5/2005 11:54:15 PM # Q
hkklife wrote:
Why don't we get "stuff like that here"? Thank the FCC and the relative insignificance of GSM in this country.

DoCoMo's network is not GSM. All those cool phones are CDMA. W-CDMA, to be precise.

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

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
Sam H @ 10/6/2005 6:28:09 AM # Q
Everyone who is making Linux phones right now is doing a lot of the platform development themselves, not just Motorola. It's out of necessity right now and it's one of the reasons why Palm OS for Linux is so eagerly awaited.

That's a non sequitur.

Motorola's developing their own middleware for Linux != "Motorola will be keen to license Palm OS for Linux"

customizability was one of the main criteria for Palm Linux from day one (really from day one of Cobalt). Windows Mobile 5, which Moto is using for the Q, is much less flexible in terms of differentiation. Linux itself is naturally more compenentized than Windows, and the framework-based architecture that PalmSource has developed carries that model up into other areas of the platform.

The customizability argument is an argument for Linux-based OSes over WM, not an argument for PalmLinux over MotoLinux. Which do you suppose Motorola would find easier to customise, middleware they wrote themselves or Palm OS?

I know for a fact that PalmSource is well aware that they'll make more money if they don't saturate the channel with lots of licensees all making very similar devices. That just turns these phones into commodities and squeezes their margins in the long run.

PalmSource don't take a percentage of the shelf price, they receive a fixed payment per device sold, so your 'margins squeezing' argument is bogus.

So if a big vendor like Motorola were to approach ACCESS with a proposal to license Palm OS it wouldn't surprise me if ACCESS would agree to some exclusivity on certain OS features.

Which would mean renegotiating their contracts with Palm, LG and GSPDA. I don't think so.

Palm and Sony always did a lot of custom work in conjunction with PalmSource developers and there's every reason to believe that would happen with Moto.

Yes, Moto could customise the Palm UI as Sony did, although it still wouldn't be truly unique. But you're missing the big point. Why would Moto prefer PalmOS-for-Linux over their own in-house solution, over which they have complete control?

Motorola's leadership doesn't alway act like they are the sharpest pencils in the box, but I have to believe they know that Palm OS gives them the ability to differentiate from Palm just as Sony did, whether they own the OS or just license it. They don't have the option to own it now, so I think they'll find licensing it is a good alternative.

You've said it yourself. You have to believe. Keep the faith Beersie, even as the facts circle you, drawing ever nearer!

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
Sam H @ 10/6/2005 7:01:23 AM # Q
So if a big vendor like Motorola were to approach ACCESS with a proposal to license Palm OS it wouldn't surprise me if ACCESS would agree to some exclusivity on certain OS features.

Which would mean renegotiating their contracts with Palm, LG and GSPDA. I don't think so.

Palm and Sony always did a lot of custom work in conjunction with PalmSource developers and there's every reason to believe that would happen with Moto.

Yes, Moto could customise the Palm UI as Sony did, although it still wouldn't be truly unique. But you're missing the big point. Why would Moto prefer PalmOS-for-Linux over their own in-house solution, over which they have complete control?

Motorola's leadership doesn't alway act like they are the sharpest pencils in the box, but I have to believe they know that Palm OS gives them the ability to differentiate from Palm just as Sony did, whether they own the OS or just license it. They don't have the option to own it now, so I think they'll find licensing it is a good alternative.

You've said it yourself. You have to believe. Keep the faith Beersie, even as the facts circle you, drawing ever nearer!

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
cervezas @ 10/6/2005 9:03:31 AM # Q
cervezas: Everyone who is making Linux phones right now is doing a lot of the platform development themselves, not just Motorola. It's out of necessity right now and it's one of the reasons why Palm OS for Linux is so eagerly awaited.

SamH: That's a non sequitur.

No, you're just losing the thread of your own argument, Sam. You gave the fact that Motorola developed their own middleware as your proof that they wanted more ability to customize. But what I pointed out (and you clipped) is that this would only prove your point if there were good alternative middleware stacks out there that they passed up on. There aren't, which is the reason almost everyone is rolling their own, not because they need extra ability to customize.

SamH: The customizability argument is an argument for Linux-based OSes over WM, not an argument for PalmLinux over MotoLinux. Which do you suppose Motorola would find easier to customise, middleware they wrote themselves or Palm OS?

Heh, if they're so fond of their own middleware the question is what were they doing begging PalmSource to accept their $300M.

Moto's Linux platform is extremely thin compared to Palm OS. It has no application stack at all, for example. All you can run on it are J2ME MIDP applications, which are mostly games intended to run on feature phones that the carriers give away to customers. No one is loyal to Motorola because of the software that runs on their phones. So sure, in the abstract you're argument is valid that Motorola might want to do everything themselves to have total control over the platform, but given the way the smartphone market is going and their current poor placement in it I think they'd be stupid to cling to middleware that doesn't come close to being competitive in that market. They could do it, but for their right to radically customize their phones they'll pay by continuing to miss release deadlines and continuing to fall behind in features.

PalmSource don't take a percentage of the shelf price, they receive a fixed payment per device sold, so your 'margins squeezing' argument is bogus.

Now, that's a non-sequitur. At the time when PalmSource negotiates an agreement with a prospective licensee that payment is not fixed and if you don't think that price has everything to do with the degree of market saturation then you're a fool. Why do you think OS makers are so tight-lipped about what their licensing fees are?

cervezas: So if a big vendor like Motorola were to approach ACCESS with a proposal to license Palm OS it wouldn't surprise me if ACCESS would agree to some exclusivity on certain OS features.

Which would mean renegotiating their contracts with Palm, LG and GSPDA. I don't think so.

Uh, how about if you just read the next sentence I wrote, ok?

cervezas: Palm and Sony always did a lot of custom work in conjunction with PalmSource developers and there's every reason to believe that would happen with Moto.

The fact that PalmSource worked together with Palm and Sony to help them add OS features in no way obliged them to change their contract with other licensees or to share that work with those licensees. It's a completely spurious argument.

So, basically, while I agree with you that Motorola might only want to play if they can own the whole enchilada, and based on other stupid business moves they've made I wouldn't put this past them, the fact remains that the benefit they would get from licensing Palm OS far exceeds the cost of giving up some control. That "control" is a double-edged sword that they're clearly getting cut by or they wouldn't have gone hat-in-hand to PalmSource in the first place.


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

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
Sam H @ 10/6/2005 1:05:22 PM # Q
you're just losing the thread of your own argument, Sam.

I think you're mistaking me for someone else, Beersie. Namely, yourself.

You gave the fact that Motorola developed their own middleware as your proof that they wanted more ability to customize.

Yup.

But what I pointed out (and you clipped) is that this would only prove your point if there were good alternative middleware stacks out there that they passed up on.

You've completely reversed your position and mine. Motorola developing their own UI proves my point that they want the ability to customise. Your point that Moto would prefer an alternative (ie PalmOS-for-Linux) to their own middleware for Linux could only be proved if such alternatives existed; and right now, as you say, they don't.

There aren't, which is the reason almost everyone is rolling their own, not because they need extra ability to customize.

But you said customizability was one of the main criteria for PalmLinux. So which is it Beersie? Is customisability important or not?

if they're so fond of their own middleware the question is what were they doing begging PalmSource to accept their $300M.

So they could have control of PalmLinux. We've been over this before.

Now, that's a non-sequitur.

Do you actually know what a non sequitur is? (It's not hyphenated for a start.)

At the time when PalmSource negotiates an agreement with a prospective licensee that payment is not fixed

It's fixed when they sign the agreement.

and if you don't think that price has everything to do with the degree of market saturation then you're a fool.

It has everything to do with how many units the licensee thinks they'll sell. That includes a lot more factors than the what you seem to think of as market saturation.

Why do you think OS makers are so tight-lipped about what their licensing fees are?

See previous point.

The fact that PalmSource worked together with Palm and Sony to help them add OS features in no way obliged them to change their contract with other licensees or to share that work with those licensees.

Good grief Beersie, are you really that dense? palmOne and Sony added their own features to PalmOS, over and above the PalmSource default spec (and requested help from PalmSource to do it). PalmSource never created features and then offered them to one licensee exclusively.

So, basically, while I agree with you that Motorola might only want to play if they can own the whole enchilada,

It's the only explanation that's supported by the facts.

the fact remains that the benefit they would get from licensing Palm OS far exceeds the cost of giving up some control.

Nope, that would be an opinion, not a fact.

That "control" is a double-edged sword that they're clearly getting cut by or they wouldn't have gone hat-in-hand to PalmSource in the first place.

It means Moto want to control their middleware. Which is what I said in my first post.

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
cervezas @ 10/6/2005 2:17:49 PM # Q
SamH wrote:
...

You know what? You're playing games now to try to obfuscate instead of actually answering my points. And you're also starting to slip into ad hominem, which is a pretty good sign that even you think your arguments aren't holding up. Since I think this should be quite clear to anyone else reading the thread I'm content to end the conversation here and leave it to the readers to decide which one of us is making sense.

The only thing I think is worth clarifying as a response to what you have written is this: yes, one of the big wins with Linux (and Palm Linux) is the freedom it gives to vendors to differentiate their devices, both software and hardware. I agree that Motorola gets some extra ability to differentiate if they stick with their own middleware (just like I could drive a totally differentiated automobile if I built it from scratch instead of, say, customizing some vehicle from Detroit). But I think Motorola's recent troubles and their attempt to buy PalmSource are signs that that level of do-it-yourself differentiation is not worth the price they have been paying for it: they're not able to build a platform that's competitive or to release devices with a reasonable time-to-market factor.

Obviously, they would have preferred to have control over the Palm OS since they were willing to pay some $300M for that right as opposed to something substantially less for a multi-year licensing agreement. But if Moto is smart I think they'll take what they can get and accept the high level of customization that Palm OS and PalmSource's engineers afford. If total control over Palm OS is worth $300M more to them than total control over MotoLinux they clearly recognize that MotoLinux is not working out so well.


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

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
Sam H @ 10/6/2005 2:24:28 PM # Q
Sorry, that should read:

But what I pointed out (and you clipped) is that this would only prove your point if there were good alternative middleware stacks out there that they passed up on.

You've completely reversed your position and mine. Motorola developing their own UI proves my point that they want the ability to customise. Your point that Moto would prefer to licensean alternative (ie PalmOS-for-Linux) to their own middleware for Linux could only be proved if such alternatives existed; and right now, as you say, they don't.

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
tthiel @ 10/6/2005 2:32:10 PM # Q
"Moto's Linux platform is extremely thin compared to Palm OS. It has no application stack at all, for example. All you can run on it are J2ME MIDP applications, which are mostly games intended to run on feature phones that the carriers give away to customers. No one is loyal to Motorola because of the software that runs on their phones. So sure, in the abstract you're argument is valid that Motorola might want to do everything themselves to have total control over the platform, but given the way the smartphone market is going and their current poor placement in it I think they'd be stupid to cling to middleware that doesn't come close to being competitive in that market. They could do it, but for their right to radically customize their phones they'll pay by continuing to miss release deadlines and continuing to fall behind in features."

It always amuses me how people can write like this on the web yet have no idea what they are talking about. The Q was just moved up to Q4 2005 and you need to do some research on their Linux efforts.

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
LiveFaith @ 10/6/2005 2:33:44 PM # Q
I have to agree with Beers asesssment. It makes no sense for Moto to spend $300M on PSRC and then dump the revenue stream in order to keep a GUI which does not even exist.

If they really were going to do that, then let this post stand as a Job Application to Motorola. I'll write em' a whiz-bang GUI and give them full rights to the source for as little as $100M! Just send me a PM and we'll get right to work on it. :-)

Pat Horne; www.churchoflivingfaith.com

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
cervezas @ 10/6/2005 2:49:11 PM # Q
The Q was just moved up to Q4 2005

Uh huh. And is that going to be running Moto's homegrown Linux OS? No, it's running WM5, which is the same kind of turnkey platform that Palm Linux will be--only not Linux. This seems to lend more support to my argument.

and you need to do some research on their Linux efforts.

Well, I'm sure that's true. ;-) I'm always willing to be educated if you have something to say.


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

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
Sam H @ 10/6/2005 2:54:30 PM # Q
it's running WM5, which is the same kind of turnkey platform that Palm Linux will be--only not Linux. This seems to lend more support to my argument.

Would that be your argument that:

Windows Mobile 5, which Moto is using for the Q, is much less flexible in terms of differentiation [than Linux]. Linux itself is naturally more compenentized than Windows

Because if it is then some people might think that you didn't have a clue what you were talking about.

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
Sam H @ 10/6/2005 3:01:47 PM # Q
You know what?

More than you, evidently.

You're playing games now to try to obfuscate instead of actually answering my points.

I'm winning the argument Beersie. It might not be something you're familiar with.

And you're also starting to slip into ad hominem,

You mean when I called you 'dense'? You went there first pal.

which is a pretty good sign that even you think your arguments aren't holding up.

Is that why you started?

Since I think this should be quite clear to anyone else reading the thread I'm content to end the conversation here

Don't be a bad loser Beersie.

and leave it to the readers to decide which one of us is making sense.

Suits me!

I agree that Motorola gets some extra ability to differentiate if they stick with their own middleware.

Gee, thanks.

But I think Motorola's recent troubles and their attempt to buy PalmSource are signs that that level of do-it-yourself differentiation is not worth the price they have been paying for it:

If Moto had bought PalmSource then they would have been doing-it-themselves, through a wholly owned subsidiary.

they're not able to build a platform that's competitive or to release devices with a reasonable time-to-market factor.

Perhaps you should tell Moto they're not able to do that, because so far it looks like that's exactly what they've been doing.

Obviously, they would have preferred to have control over the Palm OS since they were willing to pay some $300M for that right as opposed to something substantially less for a multi-year licensing agreement.

Obviously.

But if Moto is smart I think they'll take what they can get and accept the high level of customization that Palm OS and PalmSource's engineers afford. If total control over Palm OS is worth $300M more to them than total control over MotoLinux they clearly recognize that MotoLinux is not working out so well.

That's pretty impressive Beersie, you've managed to contradict yourself in the space of two sentences. First you say Moto would be smart to license Palm OS, then you acknowledge how valuable total control is to them. I'll give you a clue: you were right the second time.

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
cervezas @ 10/6/2005 3:55:08 PM # Q
If I keep answering your posts are you just going to keep getting less coherent, Sam? Pull yourself together, man.

I'm not a betting man, but perhaps we should settle this with a friendly wager. $25 says Motorola will announce they are licensing Palm OS within 6 months of the release of Palm OS for Linux. I won't even make this conditional on the outcome of Motorola's lawsuit against Palm.


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

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
Sam H @ 10/6/2005 5:25:30 PM # Q
Don't quit on me now Beersie, this is fun!

$25 says Motorola will announce they are licensing Palm OS within 6 months of the release of Palm OS for Linux.

Make it $100 and you're on.

I won't even make this conditional on the outcome of Motorola's lawsuit against Palm.

Moto don't have a lawsuit against Palm Beersie, they have one against PalmSource. When you display a command of the facts like that I almost feel bad about taking your money. Almost.

Poor Beersy...
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 10/6/2005 6:08:05 PM # Q
Debating Beersy is like taking candy from a baby. A slow-witted baby...

------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm eCONomy = Communismô

The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
cervezas @ 10/6/2005 7:19:13 PM # Q
VoR wrote:
Debating Beersy is like taking candy from a baby. A slow-witted baby...

I notice that you've decided not to try it any more, little man. Not that you every really debated anyone. Spewing invectives doesn't qualify I'm afraid.

Crawl back into your hole and try to grow a spine. Then maybe we can talk.

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

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
cervezas @ 10/6/2005 7:27:14 PM # Q
Make it $100 and you're on.

Brave words. I expect you to keep them when the time comes. We've got a deal.

I won't even make this conditional on the outcome of Motorola's lawsuit against Palm.

Moto don't have a lawsuit against Palm Beersie, they have one against PalmSource.

...which is precisely why I won't make the wager conditional on its outcome. That would be stupid.

Smart*ss!


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

Beersy, Beersy, Beersy... Palm has no openings for a TOADY.
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 10/6/2005 10:51:19 PM # Q
>>>VoR wrote:
>>>Debating Beersy is like taking candy from a baby. A slow-witted baby...

I notice that you've decided not to try it any more, little man. Not that you every really debated anyone. Spewing invectives doesn't qualify I'm afraid.

Crawl back into your hole and try to grow a spine. Then maybe we can talk.

David Beers
[Gratuitous self-promoting links deleted]

Who are you calling a man, Beersy? Oh dear.

Debating you is about as challenging as shooting fish in a barrel. Dead fish that are floating on the surface... Every thread in which you've responded to my posts has revealed you to be a rather dim-witted, grandiose, reactionary Palm Apologist who is more concerned with ingratiating himself to Palm/PalmSource employees than saying anything remotely truthful. Much like that pathetic creature known as Jeff "Bootlicker" Kirvin, you have NO CREDIBILITY, Beersy. Try being honest for a change. Otherwise, keep chugging your Palm Cultboy Kool-Aid all you want, but don't try to serve that sh!te up around here.

RE: Is this to the good or bad?
cervezas @ 10/6/2005 7:27:14 PM #

>>>Make it $100 and you're on.

Brave words. I expect you to keep them when the time comes. We've got a deal.

I won't even make this conditional on the outcome of Motorola's lawsuit against Palm.

>>>Moto don't have a lawsuit against Palm Beersie, they have one against PalmSource.

...which is precisely why I won't make the wager conditional on its outcome. That would be stupid.

Smart*ss!

Good one, Beersy. Sam H makes you look like a fool (not that that's hard to do) and the best you can come up with is "...which is precisely why I won't make the wager conditional on its outcome. That would be stupid."???

How sad. I pity you.

TVoR


------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm eCONomy = Communismô

The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823

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...