Comments on: Palm Cuts Additional Jobs

>>Give me a break! Palm's product suck.

Thats yr opinion - but why don't you try contributing something thoughful that actually relates to the subject at hand? Palms sales are not bad - they are actually making $$$ - unlike many in this space. Whether or not you feel that Palms products 'suck' has nothing to do with these layoffs as - clearly - the majority of consumers don't think they suck. Palm has the majority of PDA sales and has actually seen a slight increase in marketshare in the last year. The problem is that - and this IS FACT - overall PDA sales have been down this year. That means that the assertion that the global economy is responsible is a far more likely truth then yr troll assertion it is because 'Palms suck'. Get a life.

I definitely do NOT think that Palm's product suck, like the first poster said.
But I do agree that more memory and a 320x480 screen would be nice.

A lot of companies would love to have products that sold in the millions, at a profit, and outsold the nearest competitor by 2-to-1.

Palm has consistently been skimping on memory and CPU power. For example, in the Palm IIIe, Palm V the traces were actually there to fit at least 8MB of RAM and 4MB of ROM. They could get by in the old days because competition was not as intense.

Let's face it, people who are not computing scientists often make their decision solely on the specs alone. I have had to explain more than a few times how 8mb is "enough" when pocket pcs now have 64mb. I have had to explain how a 33Mhz CPU is just as good as a 400Mhz CPU. They do want the latest technology.

So, what does it hurt to include 64MB onboard and a 320x240 in the high-end products, and charge maybe $500 for it? Toshiba has been doing it, ViewSonic has been doing it, and now even Dell is doing it now. Not like there's no profit to be made.

As much as I like Palm OS, I do want some multitasking capability, a bigger screen, and a CPU that doesn't castrate GPRS in a smartphone.

1: If Palm sucks, than how is it outselling everyone?

2: If Palm is outselling everyone, why is it dying.

Well, maybe thats because SONY makes other products other thatn PDAs. In any case, I certainly do not think Palm is dying.

one of the reasons they may not be putting in the 64mb of memory may very well be because of the battery. The more memory you have the more battery the pda eats up, regardless of whether or not the pda is actually on. Most ppl have shown that they prefer battery life over other bonuses, and that's easy to understand. I mean a few years ago us palm users were laughing at ipaq users because of their short battery life... unless i'm mistaking, that has all but disappeared with the latest wave of palm devices, and that definitely will NOT improve if they add the extra memory. To keep competitive, palm therefore must add extra battery to keep the memory alive, which then adds to the overall bulk and size of the pda, which then also increases the size more than your original. It's a cascade effect, that in reality there is no need for. If palm really wanted to increase memory, then all they really need to do is add two SD slots, and include a free memory card with the handheld. That way all of this problem is avoided.

Gfunk, just sit back, point, and laugh at him like the rest of us.

Come on Ed, don't make me have to run you out of here again. ;)

I'm still waiting for that article, too.

-Bosco
Proud Member of the Top Non-Mods
Members: abosco and ImpReza M3

Quote: "You got me. And with all the great sales announcements from Palm, they are still cutting another 20% of their workforce. Spin it however you want"

EdH,

The layoffs at PalmSG are the result of the general down-turn last year in the pda industry overall. If you had read the link I posted, you would have realized that the Zire was one of the few reasons why Palm's losses weren't as bad as anticipated.

Furthermore, how do you think the PPC divsions of HP, Toshiba et al would have fared if they were independent pda businesses like PalmSG is? It's obvious the losses in those division are shielded by the larger revenue of the company. Can you give us a detailed synopsis of the profit/loss margins HP is having with their PPC line, I have never seen one? I would imagine their losses would be just great if not larger than PalmSG in the current economy...

"Furthermore, how do you think the PPC divsions of HP, Toshiba et al would have fared if they were independent pda businesses like PalmSG is? It's obvious the losses in those division are shielded by the larger revenue of the company."

Hey, I can't help it if Microsoft and their OEM partners have a better business model than Palm and theirs. Only Sony seems positioned to nurse a fledgeling technology until it reaches a critical mass.

Palm is making profit in a down economy. That's saying something right there. Is any other OEM using Palm or PPC OS making money? No. Palm is still selling twice as much as their closest competitor, and that's because they merged!

Palm will be making cash no matter how you cut it. The Zire is the mass seller and the money maker. Sure, the profit margin isn't high, but if it's sold in bulk, it's better for the company than a lower selling, higher profit margin device.

Unless you neglect to realize it, people have been shrieking Palm's death since 2000. It hasn't happened and it won't happen any time soon. You can take that rhetoric right back to PPCT. I don't want any of it. Oh, and I'm still waiting for that article.

-Bosco
Proud Member of the Top Non-Mods
Members: abosco and ImpReza M3

Quote: "And if Palm's model is so great, why have they lost that 26%?"

Edh, are like Bill Gates little "mini-me" or something? Sheesh! Look, how about if I put it to you this way. I think the fact that PalmOS has limited the growth of PPC to 26% despite the inherent weaknesses of PalmOS, and despite the enourmous power and strength of M$ is a testament to something right PalmOS is doing...

Furthermore, why are you soo keen to have total M$ domination here. Why would that be good for anyone? The competiton here is good for all consumers afterall, unless of course if you're on M$'s payroll I presume...

I'm skeptical of Palm's future, myself. I'm not predicting their doom any time soon, but I don't get the warm and fuzzies about what they've been coming up with for a while now. IMO, they've reacted too much to trying to match the PPC spec-wise rather than focus on what got them where they are in the first place: Zen. IOW, they need to be thinking outside the box to come up with ideas that truly make one's life simpler and integrate new features to that end. I'm not opposed to integrated MP3, high-res screens, etc. I like all that. It shouldn't be incorporated into all devices, of course, because that would prevent them meeting the low-end, but they seem to understand that much.

What disappoints me, is that they've abandoned good ideas which lacked "sizzle" but, with some tweaking, were very important. In many cases, they expended a good deal of money purchasing the companies that developed these things, too. Some examples:
1) PQAs - The promise of low-cost high-speed wireless service has been promised for a LONG time and, guess what? It still aint here. PQAs allow for quick wireless applets when the data channel is low-speed. PQAs don't replace the want/need for web browsing, they're two different technologies which meet different needs. Palm should be improving PQAs (they added some nice features in OS4), not dropping it, which is what they've done with OS5.
2) WeSync. They spent a bunch on this company and now it's history. It needed some tweaking, to be sure. But it was a fantastic concept. The problem was that it was a bit before its time because it worked best with wirelessly connected PDAs. As wireless became more common, they should have been investing more effort/marketing around this, instead they dropped it.
3) MyPalm portal. Specifically, the technology to sync your PIM data wirelessly to a server-based repository. This also allowed friends to check your schedule from any web terminal. Again, Palm spent big $$$ on a company to get this. Now it's dead.

In case you're missing a recurring theme here, it's wireless. It's interesting to note that the much-maligned Yankowski was at the helm when these companies and ideas were hatched and these technologies were dropped after he left. I can't give him credit for them and there certainly didn't seem to be a lot of love lost for him, but it makes me think anyway. Getting back to my point...I'm not seeing any REAL innovation wirelessly from PalmSource these days. I mention PalmSource, not PalmSG, because the REALLY IMPORTANT work that needs to be done is on the software-side (back-end servers, OS changes, applications, etc.). PalmSource needs to be truly innovating here with some creative ideas and their hardware OEMs will build the stuff.

With OS5 and the way OS6 seems to be going (eye candy), PalmSource seems to be trying to match Microsoft, and ignoring the true innovators who will come out of nowhere and eat everyone's lunch. They should be looking at things like the Danger HipTop, dissecting it, and learn how to think outside the box again.

Scott

>>With OS5 and the way OS6 seems to be going (eye candy),

How the heck do you have even an inkling about what OS 6 is? I think yr jumping the gun by making such an assumption. I think that one of the reasons Palm has been so slow - too slow for most geeks who visit sites like PIC - is because they've been careful to integrate new technologies without abandoning the 'Zen of Palm thing'. Of course you can't please everbody. You think Palm shouldn't be chasing PPC type features, while many people on PIC and other PDA sites scream daily about how the 'Zen of Palm' is a croc and how far behind Palm is. In the end the market will decide.

BTW - PQAs really could never be considered anything but interim technology. It works great - but it is inevitable that people demand a more multi-media type internet experience from their PDAs - just like their desktops. The cost of devices and network services that provide this capability have come down dramatically and will continue to drop until it hits a price-point that makes it accessible to average consumers. When this happens there will be zero room for archaic technology like PQAs. Is Palm jumping the gun? Maybe - but theres no doubt that the writting is on the wall for PQA technology.

they've been careful to integrate new technologies without abandoning the 'Zen of Palm thing'

Palm evidently wants to build high-end handhelds, otherwise they wouldn't be releasing $400 handhelds. And for that kind of hardware, they have to create the corresponding poweful software.

The other choice is that they stick with Zire-style devices. Then, they can practice minimalism. But that's not much of a business.

In different words, the "Zen of Palm thing" is beginning to feel increasingly like the "Zen of DOS thing".

"Unfortunately, our licensees don't generally pre-announce their new devices. But I feel very confident that this statement is incorrect. If you want, we can look back in, say, six months and see if the products bear me out."

Thanks for the response. But my point isn't about the kinds of wonderful hardware people can put together and that they then put PalmOS on, it's about what I as a software developer can actually do with that hardware.

People can throw lots of hardware into Palm devices. But as a software developer, I can't use it without spending a huge amount of time on it, if at all. The Clie NZ90, for example, is a great piece of hardware. I'd love to port some imaging software to it. But PalmOS simply isn't up to it: it doesn't have APIs to use the camera, it doesn't have a reasonably flexible windowing system to move the GUI code over without major changes, and it doesn't have the memory management and file I/O to cope with large amounts of data. Sure, I could work around all that somehow, mixing 68k and ARM code, using Sony proprietary APIs (if they have been published at all--I can't find them), completely rewriting the GUI, etc.

But what's the point? The amount of effort involved would be worse than porting to real-mode DOS. The code is much easier to port already to the Zaurus and (gasp) even PocketPC, both of which have true 32bit operating systems, and both of which are perfectly reasonable choices for vertical applications; in fact, battery life, size, and weight on non-Palm hardware has improved so much that they are better than Palm now. And Palm claims they will come out with a decent, native OS for PalmOS 6 anyway, and that will be real soon now, so why invest a lot of time and effort in interim solutions?

So, yes, licensees can slap lots of hardware into a little box and run PalmOS 5 on it, just like Sony does. But that doesn't make that an attractive platform for anything. Devices like Sony's are, increasingly, complex pieces of hardware that also, in some corner of their brain, happen to run some form of PalmOS for some PDA functions.

I like my little Palm for PDA functions--it's great at that, and I wouldn't trade it for something else. But as a handheld software platform for vertical apps or even complex personal apps, the Palm is a non-starter in its current form for me as a software developer. I do hope that PalmOS 6 will be radically different; it has to be in order to remain competitive.

EdH, you're FUD is getting more blatant. Time to take your medication...

Scott

"Palm's problems partially stem from even their *ancient* organizers being "good enough" for PDA works"

Of course. That's why they want to move into high-end organizers and vertical apps, but they aren't delivering the software or hardware to do it.

"It's amazing how bitter these boards get. All that Shaudenfraude when Palm stumbles..."

It has nothing to do with that. I'm a software developer, and I don't like being tied to Microsoft. But the only widely used alternative I have is PalmOS 4/5, which imposes serious limitations on otherwise pretty nice hardware like the TT, the NZ90, and other models.

Either I want Palm to deliver a modern 32 bit handheld platform--they have had more than enough time to develop it--or make room for someone who does.