Comments on: PalmSource Acquired By ACCESS

In all of his guessing, Skippy did get one thing right besides the spelling of my name. I do, in fact, do Linux-ish things for PalmSource. ;) (I'm the NAND/filesystem guy.)

Anyway, a correction, from history:

The story of M$ dominating the market because they were a software company and hardware companies didn't want to be in that business anymore is a neatly wrapped package. Unfortunately, it's not what happened.

It was IBM that established the dominance of the "PC" (upper case) over the personal computer -- purely as the act of a hardware company. They had the muscle to do their own software, and the PC was the only product in their line where they didn't.

It was the IBM PC, and not M$'s OSes that caused all of the hadware vendors to do their thing. It was, in fact, the BIOS and desire for "exact PC compatibility" that put Intel and IBM in the forefront of the "personal computer revolution".

Then IBM dropped the ball, and Microsoft picked it up and ran with it. It wasn't even M$'s ball. It was one they licensed from a company that did operating systems and then resold to IBM, and, eventually, all the PC clones. (Ironically, in more than 35 years of IBM watching, the PC is the only ball I've ever seen them really and truely drop.)

I haven't done a line count on current browsers, but given that the Linux kernel contains nearly 50 megabytes of source code, I find it difficult to imagine that a browser, well, at least a competently written one, could be any bigger. I'm sure mozilla is. ;)

Personally, I don't see the phone market at all like the PC market in the 80s, for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is Linux. In the 80s, we were just figuring out the whole idea of portable OSes when the PC came along and set us back a few years.

Now, highschool kids put together pretty competent "platforms". It's not like the 80s when only a handful of us were lucky enough to have the kind of money that allowed us to have the sort of workstations that are now routinely available off the shelf for a grand. None of this stuff is new any more.

Well, not entirely true. The one thing that's new is that people are putting all this crap onto itty-bitty devices with no hard drives, crappy displays, horrible hardware UIs, and significant power demands.

As far as Linux freeing up the hardware makers to innovate in the hardware: I know two things from first hand experience:

1) They do believe that
2) It's not true

A lot of people are playing in the "let's paste a UI on Linux and call it a cellphone OS" space. There are three credible efforts in this area. IMO, the two to watch are PalmSource and Maemo. (Yeah, I know, Maemo's not for phones -- yet)

That said, I don't believe that PalmLinux is why Access is buying PalmSource.

And no, as a grunt, I don't know any more about this than any of you. I just know what I read on Reuters.

Marty Fouts
Lead Linux Lizard
PalmSource Core Technology Department

But for those saying PALM's now out of the picture with PalmOS that comentary by the CEO of PALM up above says they're still there - contracts can be changed...

The price seems ridiculous, but perhaps not in a few possible scenarios:

1) Access-as-the-New-Palm theory: Access becomes a more intelligent Palm: contracts with HTC, etc and becomes a one-stop supplier of phones to carriers. Nice way to segue out of the browser business now that the power of future hardware will soon allow open source browsers to run acceptably, "Netscaping" Access' NetFront browser.

Fly in the ointment: Palm's renegotiated contract with PalmSource allows them to keep their clutches on PalmOS for 5 more years. For the "one-stop supplier" idea to be effective a company needs (Apple-style) COMPLETE control over both OS and hardware.

2) Access-as-puppet theory: Access acquires PalmSource + runs it into the ground for the benefit of a shadowy Redmond-colored figure lurking in the background.

3) Access-as-a-better-Symbian theory: Great OS + huge app library + good developer community + fair developer tools; without overbearing spectre of Nokia trying to run the show = instant mobile platform IF packaged with ALL the ingredients (as I've previously suggested that PalmSource have rolled into PalmOS). It wouldn't take a lot of effort to make PalmOS into a killer mobile platform. PalmSource was too clueless to see this. A better-run company might have better luck.

4) Access-as-hostagetaker: I wonder if Palm would be willing to reconsider how badly it needs PalmOS and pay Access an extra premium to regain control of PalmOS now that Access has abducted it while Palm was sleeping?

TVoR

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

The Palm eCONomy = Communism™

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

How PalmSource is REALLY doing: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8026#110958

Beersy, in case you haven't figured it out yet, the REAL money is in selling hardware to carriers. The mobile OS business is about to get pretty shaky as developmet of "free" Linux phone OSes continue. As others have said, "It's hard to compete with free". The way to compete is by providing carriers with COMPLETE solutions that painlessly give them product to offer to their customers: a proven industry-standard framework (Palm platform) + "free" open source OS underpinnings (ARMLinux) + slick hardware (HTC).

Which is the better business model: Eking out a living selling copies of your mobile OS to cellphone hardware manufacturers at $5/copy, waiting for the day that they unceremoniously dump you for "free Linux" or selling a complete package (OS + hardware) to carriers for $25 - $50 profit/phone and maintaining complete control over the platform? It's not about making yourself attractive to hardware manufacturers - it's about making a platform you control (completely) attractive to CARRIERS. Now do you get it?

The Treo 600 was a brilliant first step in making PalmOS a viable platform for carriers, but Palm was too lazy/stupid/underfunded to take this to the next level by giving carriers a full lineup of PalmOS smartphones and not-so-smarthones. Had Palm locked up ownership of PalmOS it could have been in the drivers' seat: in total control of an increasingly popular PalmOS platform available to carriers and also able to offer Windows Mobile hardware to anyone that wants it.

As I posted before in this thread, there are a few potential reasons why Access would have outbid PalmSource. Whichever scenario is correct, the fact that Palm was outbid is NOT reassuring.

Something's rotten in the state of Palm™.

TVoR

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

The Palm eCONomy = Communism™

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

How PalmSource is REALLY doing: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8026#110958

Marty Fouts
Lead Linux Lizard
PalmSource Core Technology Department

Unfortunately, Dell is a unique case (as you are fully aware). Cutthroat marketing, just-in-time production, efficiency, good value/good quality (in the early days), economies of scale, favored status from suppliers, visionary leadership, merciless competitiveness, innovation, good timing and a little luck all helped make Dell become what it is today. Last I checked, Palm possessed none of these attributes other than a lot of luck (finding the original secret recipe with PalmOS + the Pilot form factor 10 years ago and then 2 years ago finding the Treo life raft that it is now clinging to so desperately). The odds of another Dell coming along in the World of Mobile Devices (WMD) is approximately ZERO. This is now a commodity market, just like computers are, Bubba.

Try again, Marty. You can do better. I had such high hopes for you. Please don't disappoint me.

TVoR

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

The Palm eCONomy = Communism™

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

How PalmSource is REALLY doing: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8026#110958

First, Skippy, the PC business was already a cut throat commodity business when Michael Dell got into it, so your argument that there can't be a Dell in the phone business because it's a commodity cut throat business is no more than your usual misunderstanding of business.

Second, Skippy, your numbers, as usual, are wrong. In this case, your numbers on profitability on software versus hardware. Ironic that a Microsoft fan such as yourself would get that one backwards.

Third, Skippy, when you wrote "in the near future different flavors of Linux, designing a phone is largely about coming up with your unique hardware (like Motorola's RAZR) to differentiate your product and picking an off-the-shelf OS + apps." you wrote your funniest line ever.

Thanks for reminding us that you have no insight at all into how the consumer electronics business operates.

Poor Skippy, confused again. In a commoditized hardware market, product differentiation does _not_ come from "unique hardware". So either you're wrong and the hardware market isn't commoditized yet, or you're wrong about how one goes about designing a phone. (Actually, you're wrong about both, because, as usual, you lost the point in your attempt to oversimplify.)

Since you're starting from a premise that far off base, it's no surprise that your arguments get farther and farther from reality, so we'll just leave it at pointing that out for now.

Marty Fouts
Lead Linux Lizard
PalmSource Core Technology Department

Hey Marty, I'd enjoy reading your analysis of why you see PalmSource and Maemo as credible frameworks for mobile Linux and not QTopia.

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

This soap opera will conclude in a few weeks. Don't miss the SHOCKING season finale!

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

The Palm eCONomy = Communism™

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

This isn't like the SciFi Channel deal where they advertise the "season finale" when it's really just the last episode before the fall hiatus, is it? 'Cause I hate that.

C'mon Chris, you know better than that!

Palm has no reason to own Garnet. Leaving aside the question of why they would even want to get back into the business of writing and maintaining their own OS from the ground up, there is the fact that Garnet's RTOS cooperative multitasking architecture is slowly strangling them. They've publicly stated that they are going to ditch it as soon as Palm OS for Linux is ready and I'm amazed to hear you suggesting they should do anything different at this point.

As for buying "the remnants of Cobalt," that doesn't make any sense either. It seems to me that all the reasons PalmSource had to turn away from Cobalt and put all their energies toward Palm Linux apply just as well to Palm. The only value Cobalt has at this point is that it's a good start on the middleware for a Linux platform. But why would either Access or Palm think it a good idea for there to be two Cobalt-based Linux platforms in the market?

When you look at the outcome of the bidding war you need to remember: Palm could not expect the kind of licensing revenue that a software company like Access could from the Palm OS because prospective licensees would be reluctant to depend on Palm, a competitor, for their OS. We all saw how Motorola bailed from Symbian OS after Nokia bought a controlling interest and Palm knew very well that the same could happen to Palm OS if they reacquired it. This limited what they would be willing to bid.

The main reason Palm wanted to buy PalmSource back wasn't that they needed to own PalmSource's IP or people, it's that they needed to keep competitor Motorola from owning PalmSource's IP and people. As I've said before, the high price that Access paid for PalmSource is very likely a sign that Palm helped Access make the acquisition once the bidding hit the point where it didn't make sense for Palm anymore. In other words, that price reflected not just the value to Access of owning PalmSource--it reflected the value to Palm of Access owing PalmSource. The help probably came in the form of advance license agreements paid in cash conditional on the success of the merger.

Once Palm was assured that PalmSource was safe in the hands of a company they could deal with they had no further reason to want to buy pieces of the company. Believing otherwise is just some kind of wishful thinking--and IMO it's not even something people should wish for.

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

Also, what do you honestly propose/suggest/predict Palm's new releases throughout 2006 will be running? Or will '06 be just Treo and Mobile Manager releases?

New blood is crucial in this industry, especially with a 2x per year product launch cycle. If the two new units are indeed the final Garnet models to be launched, what will carry Palm through '06? They will soon be in need of a new midrange PDA or two, a new POS Treo would be nice and the LifeDrive CERTAINLY needs some improvements if it's not dropped.

Do you think they can coast through another year on FrankenGarnet 5.4.9?

The matter of what Palm NEEDS to sell NEW product is now a far more pressing concern than the fate of the OS as it is, as you said, in the hands of an "ally". Prior to the acquisition by Access, I figured the deathwatch was on PalmSource. Now Palm is on shaky ground with (confirmed) plans for continued Garnet rehases and a WinMob Treo on a single carrier (for the time being). That won't be enough to get them through '06 intact, will it?

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

They've been hacking away at the margins of Garnet, yes, and they will continue to do so for a while--there's no reason to think the Access acquisition will change that any more than the original PalmSource spin-off did. But the kind of problems we've seen with the LifeDrive and the Treo 650 are indicative that this isn't a strategy they want to live with any longer than they absolutely have to. Simply licensing Garnet from Access is, I'm sure, perfectly fine for them in the interim.

Do you think they can coast through another year on FrankenGarnet 5.4.9?

You're the one who is making the argument that Palm wants to keep using Garnet, not me.

I can't say that we've necessarily seen the end of Garnet, but I can say this: we had news that Palm was working on Linux devices well before we got any wind that PalmSource was moving in that direction. That news came from the same source that first stated Palm was working with Windows Mobile last year. Whether Palm is working on their own Linux platform (designed to address concerns and device classes that are different from the ones PalmSource is focused on) or are working side by side with PalmSource on Palm OS for Linux--or both--is hard to say. But judging by the things we've seen and heard since, I wouldn't be surprised at all if we see a Linux-based device from Palm very close to the time of the Palm OS for Linux release next year--possibly even before Palm Linux is released.

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

Not forever, perhaps, but it seems to be a race they're winning for now. The budget PDAs that Palm sells are their highest margin products and they still sell well. I recall reading somewhere that Franklin and Royal (among others) still sell a surprisingly large number of cheap organizers. If the low-end Zires are profitable, why cede that market? Sure, most of those people will eventually move up to a smartphone, but they're more likely to move up to one made by Palm if they're already hooked on Palm OS.

What you're forgetting about RAZR is the lack of a touchscreen. A lot of people who won't enter text or try to navigate menus on a 12-button keypad are more than happy to use a stylus with handwriting recognition and a familiar form-like interface with buttons, checkboxes, combos, etc.

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

Maybe so. But the anonymous source who first "outed" Palm's WinMob plans stated that Palm had already been testing Linux devices for "for some time" as of a year ago. So we could see the fruits of that work very soon, right?

I think Palm will try to get one more Treo refresh on Garnet, but I expect they'll have a Linux version already well into the pipeline of FCC and vendor testing before the official release of Palm OS for Linux. Because that takes so long it probably won't see the light of day before 2006 is out, but it will in early 2007.

However, I do think we should expect to see handheld products on Linux by the Fall since I think those are being developed concommitantly with Palm OS for Linux. There will also be one last gasp for Garnet on the lower end Palm handhelds at that time. Then, by 2007 I expect Palm to be completely on board with a Palm Linux + WinMob line-up on the phone side and all-Linux on the handheld side. Whatever comes out of Palm's "Third Business" and whenever we start to see it, I expect it to be Linux-based.

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

Sounds as realistic of a roadmap as any I've thought of/seen/heard/read.

I hadn't forgotten Colligan's comment but I had assumed that the world-beating combination of BT & wi-fi in a single "affordble" and (mostly) bug-free device was the "news". Alongside the <$100 color Z22 of course. I doubt today's BB announcement qualifies for a "trick" either.

If anything, there might end up being a VERY mildly refreshed Garnet Treo (BB connect, 64mb RAM) in the works for Sprint and/or Verizon. I personally expect at one more release cycle of Garnet devices-two at most. Either way, it'll be all Linux & WinMob devices in '07, save for whatever carryover legacy low-end Garnet devices are still in the channel.

After reading between the lines on today's announcement it definitely sounds like a new POS Treo is in the works for early '06 (or sooner). If nothing else, announcing the BB solution for the Treo 650 turns the attention back to it and helps clear the retail channels of unsold inventory--a smart move to reinforce support for an EOL product so Palm doesn't "m505" themselves again.

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

I know you're probably right--I'm going way out on a limb without much good evidence there. And to give Palm their due, a sub-$300 TX and a sub-$100 Z22 really is a pretty good trick.

It's funny, while I admit to having been annoyed that Palm would build a Windows version of the Treo, the announcement also planted this seed in my head that, hey, these guys really can surprise us sometimes. Ironically, it makes me look forward to the coming year, wondering what the next surprise might be and looking for clues.

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

Well, of course you're right. Revolutionary stuff gets picked up only by early adopters at first and has to climb all the way up the bell curve for a few years before getting really big, while evolutionary products can start more or less where their nearest ancestors left off on the curve.

But if you listen to how the Palm guys talk, they don't seem daunted by the prospect of launching another revolution. They've still got a few good years in the PDA market where they're once again gaining market share (albeit of a declining pie)... the Treo is doing great and should be very popular on Windows... they know, I sense, that there isn't going to be a better time to take some chances on something bold.

I'm still thinking about what that bold thing might be but you're right about one thing: anything I come up with seems unlikely to be a success out of the gate.

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

I guess I'm asking is, what realistically would be Hawking's revolutionary new line? It needs to be something that will play to Palm's strengths and interests, and would have clear prospects for catching on with the public or business. Maybe a very very slim mini-laptop with 24 hour battery life, 800x600 screen, 20GB HDD and EVDO built-in?

Surur

As for Linux growing as a smartphone platform, what those numbers don't reflect is that most Linux phones wouldn't really qualify as smartphones under any reasonable definition, they're just phones that have had a Linux kernel stuffed in, like Nokia's "Symbian" camera phones.

Nothing except the need to recover the price they are talking about paying. You don't need to spend $300+M if all you want is a glorified cell phone skin.

As for Linux growing as a smartphone platform, what those numbers don't reflect is that most Linux phones wouldn't really qualify as smartphones under any reasonable definition, they're just phones that have had a Linux kernel stuffed in, like Nokia's "Symbian" camera phones.

You're right, but that's a good thing not a bad thing. True, you and I are mostly interested in smartphones, but even though that's the fastest growing segment of the market, it's growing from a very small base compared to the feature phone market (however you want to define that). One way to grow the Palm OS is to do just just what PalmSource has been planning since their CMS acquisition: release a feature phone platform that is data-compatible with Palm OS and shares many aspects of the look and feel so people living in the largest segment of the market (by more than an order of magnitude) have a smooth migration path up to your smarter Palm OS phones.

I don't know if that's still going to be part of the plan any more than the rest of you. But I've thought it made pretty good sense from the first time I heard it.

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

release a feature phone platform that is data-compatible with Palm OS and shares many aspects of the look and feel so people living in the largest segment of the market (by more than an order of magnitude) have a smooth migration path up to your smarter Palm OS phones.

Is a Ipaq running styletap a POS device? How about a Linux phone running the M68 interpreter? If Access want to penetrate the featurephone market, with their 220x176 screen non-touch screens there is not going to be much left of the character of POS.

PalmSource is dead, and possibly Access was duped into believing they are more viable than they actually are, but this does not bode well for POS devices.

Surur

The "feature phone" market isn't doing so hot either. There was just an article in USA Today talking about how sparkly multipurpose cellphones are falling flat, because the vast majority of people want a phone that they can talk on.

Even if "feature phones" are doing better in Europe and Asia, Europe is owned by Microsoft and Symbian, while Asia prefers open source, free, and nearly free.

Maybe the power management example was bad. What about adding support for a new VOIP protocol? If it's not already supported on a closed-source OS like WM or Symbian all you can do is ask and wait. Meanwhile your device languishes. But with Linux you're free to implement the protocol and it can actually become part of what the open-source community carries forward. If others like the feature you have added and have the incentive to maintain and improve it, you may not have to do much to carry it forward at all.

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

Sorry I wasn't clear. We're not talking past each other, I'm just not making my point very well. Yes, PalmSource developers can become part of the open source community. Actually, the tense there should be "have become". I was contributing to open source projects long before the phrase 'open source' became popular.

At the moment, we are actively participating in, and have contributed to, the Linux kernel, in general, and the TI OMAP support in particular. I am a committer on YAFFS2. We also have several other projects in the works that will contribute to the open source community, and we're participating in many relevant projects, such as power management.

You are right that if there's a vacuum you can fill it and the open source community may accept it. But in practice, the vacuums that are interesting to the community tend to attract multiple attempted solutions. That's when you have to make the go-it-alone versus be-in-the-community decision, and that's where you find control to be illusory.

How we are replacing NVFS *is* a good example of what we're doing. We did a due dilligence investigation of file systems that might be adaptable to the unique properties of flash, especially NAND, hardware. We brought a guy onto staff with a lot of file system experience (that would be me.)

We opted for a solution that involved relying on open source: JFFS2 and YAFFS2. We've engaged the community and are participating in the development of those file systems. We've established sufficient credibility within that community as a result of our contribution that I was given committer status on the YAFFS2 project.

But PDAs have unique requirements that aren't of general interest to the community, so we've also got some ongoing inhouse work that adds facilities above the file system layer. Some of this is specific to supporting PalmOS development, and we don't expect the open source community to be interested in it. Other bits may be of more general interest, and, at an appropriate time, we'll review them and if it seems reasonable, make them available as open source.

Marty Fouts
Lead Linux Lizard
PalmSource Core Technology Department

Cobalt Jr.?

Copeland Redeux?

BeOS II?

Wait a minute...that's a trick question! Anyone who has taken Zen of Palm 101 knows that "If an OS falls in a forest, does it need a name?"

You have done well, Grasshopper. I applaud you with the sound of one hand clapping.

TVoR

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

The Palm eCONomy = Communism™

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

How PalmSource is REALLY doing: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8026#110958

it'll be fun finding out what that is and whether they were right.

Anyway, it was announced looong ago that Web Browser 3 for Cobalt would be based on Access Netfront technology:

http://www.palminfocenter.com/view_story.asp?ID=7165

Perhaps, the collaboration in developing the browser is what ultimately led to the acquisition of PalmSource by Access Tech...

--------------------
Gaurav

Here's what access to China is worth:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09/07/microsoft_google/

If Access was doing this to gain access to the American market it would make a whole lot more sense, especially to be the default browser on a very successfull Treo.

Still... bizarre....

Surur

I know Access paid a huge premium, but they are NOT a natural partner for PalmSource. In a way its like a guppy swallowing a whale, and I do not see any good coming of this for Palm OS.

I'd be surprised if Access wasn't at least as big as PalmSource. Anyway, when it comes to acquisitions the relative size of the buyer and target is not as relevant as the financials, current and expected.

It would have made so much more sense (accept financially) if PalmSource bought Access, to provide the best of class mobile browser to future Palm users.

Surur

Access is larger (by staff) than PalmSource. PalmSource couldn't buy Access because it didn't have the money.

The American market's not interesting to Asian companies. The Asian market, especially China, is. That's where the growth is and the opportunity to expand.

There aren't any established Linux variants in China. CMS is as close as anyone.

Marty Fouts
Lead Linux Lizard
PalmSource Core Technology Department

or

AcceSource

Barring that, something with "Source" and "NetFront" worked in there.

I think the overall lack of wailing and colorful comments on this and other sites speaks volumes for the utter surprise of someone *other* than Palm buying 'em up.

1src tends to cater to palm users who talk about using their palms. PIC caters more toward people discussing Palm as a business. Not a lot of "Who will buy whom" threads over there. Not a lot of "How do I make my palm connect to Nokia BT headset" over here.

Different audiences with diffent interests.

*disclosure -- I was laid off from Palm in 2002*

It's really too bad. Palm was a great company, with the right group of people -- actually alot of disaffected Apple folks, who had left when Jobs was pushed out. Plus the original brain trust of Jeff Hawkins and Donna Dubinsky. Those 2 recognized that Palm could not really be the nimble company they would need to be to survive if they were tied down to 3Com. They asked permission to take the company solo, and were denied by the 3Com brass -- so they started Handspring.

Then (IMHO) really just to spite Jeff and Donna, 3Com did indeed spin off Palm. The problem was with Jeff and Donna gone, leadership was missing. 3Com installed Carl Yankowski, and man who had run giant companies before, but never a nimble tech company. Carl didn't know how to run a company of 500 employees, but he did not how to run a company of 10000, so his goal was to get to 10000 as quickly as possible.

This meant massive hirings and acquisitions. Palm had had a damn fine IPO (Yankowski knew how to do that too) so they had alot of cash on hand. And they started hiring like crazy. And when I say like crazy, I mean they put no thought at all into who got the positions, merely that they filled them. This was 1999/2000 pre-bubble-burst, when anyone with half a brain in silicon valley was already working. As a result, Palm was "forced" to hire people with only a quarter of a brain. Bythat I mean managers who thought they could function as engineers, and people who knew how to play the company game.

Intense corporate infighting began betweeen divisions. When one division looked like it was gaining "power" other divisions would sabotage them. The "managers" that Palm had been able to hire were only interested in making sure that their group looked better than any other group. As a result, incredibly promising ideas, such as 100% VCal/vcard complaince got killed. Palm was going to host a free public database with vcard/vcal entries, so when you updated your info in your palm, it would spread to everyone else when they synced (I know it's *sortof* been done -- but not well by anyone, and certainly the data is not publicly accessible via soap). Palm's internet strategy was completely sabotaged by "executives" who weren't part of the internet group, and really didn't undertand anything about it.

Then the hardware disaster. One of the new Palm's was scheduled for release, and was in the final round of testing. Handspring released their new device and it was Shiny. The Palm marketing team, without really consulting with engineering announced WHILE THE DEVICE WAS STILL IN TESTING that the new Palm would be out next month. Sales of current Palms stopped cold while everyone waited for the new device. And then a showstopping bug was found. The vibrate alarm in the new device was too powerful, and after x number of alarms it shook loose something in y number of devices. So the new device was delayed. And all that time, very few Palms were being sold, because everyone was waiting for the new device. 3 months with no sales is a bad thing.

In a last ditfch effort to calm the infighting, Palm spun off the software division into Palmsource, but it was too little too late. The heart and back of a great little company had been broken.

I'm glad to see Palm still alive, and I'm actually glad to see this sale, I kept my equity this long, at least now I'm forced to get rid of it.

I believe the company has shrunk back down to a small enough size that they've attritioned off the morons acquired at the turn of the century -- unfortunately they lost alot of really good engineering talent too. Palm was more than a hardware company at one point -- now they are just a hardware company. And I don't believe a hardware company can be globally competetive if it's based in the U.S."

Those of us who know what happened when the Be refugees arrived at Palm saw this coming from Day 1. The Be Boppers felt they were "too good for Palm" and that they had a "higher calling" than making a mere PDA OS. They still dreamed of making the perfect Windows/Mac-conquering OS - with code so perfect that all who touched it would be compelled to cast their eyes down and bow down before their Holy Be Greatness. The Be people appeared to be ALL incapable of understanding that the goal was to build a stable OS quickly. Instead, those twits agonized over their dream of making BeOS 6. But BeOS 6/PalmOS 6/Cobalt ended up as dead as EVERYTHING Be has ever touched.

Thanks for nothing, Gassée. Merci bien.

Your Pal,
TVoR

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

The Palm eCONomy = Communism™

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

How PalmSource is REALLY doing: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8026#110958

You would have fit in perfectly with Gassée's Gang, Mr. Fouts. You have the same (lack of) personality that we see in the typical Be engineer.

I will comment on PalmSource now, though. It ain't Be. It does have senior people with long track records of delivering products. It got shaken up in the last round of layoffs.

"Trust us - we try harder™"

Yes, some of the detritus like the Mace-Man were cleaned out with the recent firings (along with a couple people that were actually good workers), but even more offal still remains at PalmSource. The company needed to clean house two years ago, cannibalize Tapwave + HandEra and outsource a TON of development. The current Hail Mary pass is far too little, far too late.

Sorry Marty, but we heard the same useless SPIN when PalmSource failed to produce Cobalt back in December, 2003. The excuses were beyond pathetic. Only problem is that time has now run out.

It's too bad that the FUDers are effective on internet fora, but, where it counts, with investors and customers, the executive team is getting the message out.

Judging from the price Access is offering, I'd say that the message is being well received.

Unfortunately for PalmSource, it's not FUD if it's true.

I am still absolutely stunned by the Access deal. I wonder if any geisha girls, gallons of sake and hidden cameras were a part of the deal? ;-O

Now it's up to engineering to deliver. I wouldn't use Cobalt as a gauge of whether we will or not. There are different people in charge. There's a different core engineering team. There's a different internal emphasis. There are different relationships with customers.

Uh huh. That was then. This is now. A whole new crew's in da house! Suuuuuuuuuuure, Marty.

It comes down to two things:

1) Whether the engineering effort to integrate PalmOS with Linux has been appropriately scoped and staffed.

2) Whether the market will accept the results.

We'll know the answer to one in 15 months. We'll start to see the answer to two six months later.

The doom'n'gloomers can whine all they want between now and then, and, I'm sure they well, but in reality, only time will tell.

One of the things that the doom'n'gloomers don't seem to get is the way the phone market is evolving. It'll be fun to watch how that plays out.

Marty Fouts
Lead Linux Lizard
PalmSource Core Technology Department

- It's a shame that PalmOS may ultimately die because PalmSource was too cheap/arrogant/stupid to invest adequate resources to develop the OS. Such a waste.

- 2 years is 1 year too many, Mr. Fouts. Why must you learn this the hard way?

It's pathetic to see that a conservative company like Nokia seems to display a sense of urgency that PalmSource lacks.

TVoR

- CLIE collector
- Pundit
- Visionary
- FUD buster
- Power user supreme
- Beta test overlord
- Marty outer

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

The Palm eCONomy = Communism™

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

How PalmSource is REALLY doing: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8026#110958

"- CLIE collector
- Pundit
- Visionary
- FUD buster
- Power user supreme
- Beta test overlord
- Marty outer"

Ed Hansberry's stooge, more likely.

Keep it up grasshopper, you are becoming a parody of yourself.

IBM's near and dear to my heart Skippy, because it's the only player in this space that's been around the industry a lot longer than I have. IBM may not be planning a phone, but I'm guessing you've not heard of e-lap.

> The REAL profits will come from being a player in the low
> end, so PalmSource's current licensees may end up getting
> fcuked now that Access is calling the shots with PalmOS
> development.

Why sure, Skippy. We're just going to write off a minimum of $100M in revenue from Palm (you remember Palm, don't you, big customer of Access,) just so we don't have to . . ., er, um, Skippy, just what is it you think we wouldn't do in the low end that we're not already doing in the high end?

> PalmLinux either will get canned or else NetFront will take
> over from Rome as the new UI. This is not good.

Oddly Skippy, the new UIs are the one thing that I can see Access having some input on. They are, after all, in the UI business. But I'd think you'd applaud a company with a successful UI product having input in the design of the UI.

> I'm usually right in my predictions, but I'll admit freely
> that I definitely did not see the Access train coming

You haven't been right in any prediction you've made since I've been here, other than the spelling of my name. That's an unusual definition of "usually" you're using.

Marty Fouts
Lead Linux Lizard
PalmSource Core Technology Department

Oh, Skippy, please don't try to read contracts, it's not in your skill set. You seem to have missed this clause:

>> subject to the Company meeting certain development
>> milestones.

See that phrase "certain development milestones", Skippy? You really think Palm's forking out a lot of money and the milestones are "warmed over Garnet", Skippy? Or is this just more of your spin^whyperbole.

> So Access is in the UI business? Really? And I thought they
> were in the business of selling a browser for mobile devices.
> How silly of me to get confused. And the Garnet/Cobalt UI
> already works fine, thanks.

Oh, Skippy, not more position reversals? You were whining about the cancellation of new telephony UIs, not the Garnet/Cobalt UI. And elsewhere, you lauded Surur for digging up a position paper that described Access as being in the UI business. Skippy, you've really got to stop trying to take all positions.

> I suspect Access is planning on pounding a square peg
> (NetFront) into a round hole (PalmLinux).

Well, you suspected that I had a financial interest in Palm, and that they were going to buy PalmSource next year, so I hope you don't mind if I suspect your suspicions.

Marty Fouts
Lead Linux Lizard
PalmSource Core Technology Department

> Actually, no - I didn't miss the clause. In fact, I quoted it
> and even linked to the actual document, Marty.

Ah, Skippy. You pasted it. You then wrote something that indicated that you'd ignored it. My guess is that you didn't understand it.

> 1) I interpret that as saying the $42.5 million in 2006 is
> guaranteed no matter what Access does/fails to do. The ever-
> decreasing minimums of $35/20/10 million for 2007/8/9 appear
> to be the ones governed by that clause, Marty. Then again,
> reading contracts is "not in [my] skill set".

If that's your reading, you definitely don't know how to read contracts.

> But you didn't answer the simple question, Marty. You always
> seemed to have a keen interest in math and how figures add
> up. Can you please tell the court where you came up with your
> claimed "minimum of $100M in revenue from Palm"?

Jeez Skippy. The numbers are right up there in the document you quoted. If PalmSource performs, there's 42M + 35M + 20M + 10M in minimums. You can add, can't you Skippy, er, no, of course not. 42+35=77. 77+20=97. 97+10=107. I truncated Skippy. Hope you don't mind the missing 7M in my math.

> Surur was clever enough to find a manifesto from Access which
> seems to expose EXACTLY what their plans will be for
> PalmLinux

It's not a manifesto, Skippy, it's an article in LinuxWorld. And it was written over a year ago. Plus, it doesn't say anything "EXACTLY", it just makes some fairly general statements.

> and why they thought a floundering company like PalmSource
> was worth over $300 MILLION. He deserves to be applauded as
> being the person who revealed what Access will likely do with
> the PalmSource programmers and IP. Do you think Surur made a
> valid contribution to this discussion, Marty? I certainly do.

I think he found an interesting piece of year old writing for a trade magazine. It doesn't tell me anything about what Access will do in the considerably different circumstances they find them in as PalmSource owners, than when they wrote the article.

> Enough with the lies already. Marty, I said you are a
> PalmSource EMPLOYEE. Period (Go back to the original post
> where I outed you if you need to refresh your memory.)

Um, no, Skippy, you didn't. You had me down as a Palm employee at one point, and as having financial interest in Palm at another. You also guessed contractor at a third point. It is, as you say, all there. Which is why your denying it is so amusing.

> is obvious to those of us who follow the platform that Palm
> would not survive unless they regained OWNERSHIP of PalmOS.

The funny thing here, Skippy, is that you're the only one who says or seems to believe that. Something's obvious here, but not what you're claiming.

Marty Fouts
Lead Linux Lizard
PalmSource Core Technology Department

2) Whether the market will accept the results.

Now that you're a disgraced FORMER PalmSource employee I assume you now realize that

1) the engineering effort to integrate PalmOS with Linux has NOT been appropriately scoped and staffed.

and

2) the market will NOT accept the results if PalmLinux does not arrive on time in 2006.

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

The Palm eCONomy = Communism™

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

May You Live in Interesting Times

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

1) PalmSource is recapitalized.
2) When Access bought them they had a plan for them, so they should be more focused.
3) Access has contacts and contracts with many companies in the Far East, so they should be able to get them to take a risk on a model or two which they may not have with an American company.

I'll leave the negatives to some-one else.

Surur

1. PalmSource may no longer be committed to delivering anything at all for traditional handhelds and smartphones.

2. Having PalmSource focused on mobile phone OSes may drive remaining PalmOS licensees away.

Hopefully this isn't the case, but those are the possibilities.

It sure feels like the end times right about now! Do you recall an editorial written by Ed @ Brighthand back in May or so? It spoke of Palm([One] at the time) needing to maintain focus amidst the name change and rebranding efforts. If you look at it, there have been endless factors over the past few years distracting the Palm companies. First you had the m500 announcement/shipping delay and the arrival of the iPaqs (the first serious challengers to Palm's dominance). Then you had the rough transition to OS5 in '02. Then the Handspring acquisition and the PalmOne/PalmSource spin-off. Add to that the Cobalt fiasco, PalmOne's quality control woes, Nagel, the "Palm" $30 Mil acquisition, China Mobilesoft & Access dealings etc etc. What a bunch of headaches!

The Palm companies really haven't had a stable year to devote purely to R&D and selling their wares since 2000 or so.

Right now the best case scenario to minimize confusion would be a WELL-plotted series of press announcements & media coverage. Seeing a few roadmaps wouldn't hurt as well.

I'm especially curious to see LG's reaction to all of this as well.

CAnt even say that I am happy about it either. I hope my PalmOS devices can last until something 'as good if not better' comes. But I, consumer, have absoutley no confidence in the PalmOS.

mobileministrymagazine.com
antoinerjwright.com

C'mon Marty, don't be dense. You can't tell the difference between Access paying royalties and Access becoming the recipient of them??

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

Surur

This from a guy who a couple of days ago was insisting that Palm "dominates" the market with their 35% marketshare, and that PalmLinux was poised to turn Windows' 65% share into a "niche," presumably after PalmLinux actually gets released in 18-24 months. You would be taken a lot more seriously if you weren't acting so painfully fanboyish.

Perhaps I'm insulting some folks' intelligence here, but it's perfectly obvious that this is *fantastic* news for the palm OS.

It isn't "fantastic news" until there's reason to believe it's fantastic news. PalmSource is being bought out and recapitalized. Sometimes that turns out well, sometimes it turns out badly. I can't count the number of stories I know about one company buying another and it turning into a disaster, particularly with overseas buyers. "Dilbert" didn't spring from whole cloth.

ACCESS *obviously* didn't buy PalmSource to kill it: PalmSource can *only* be worth the huge *premium* that ACCESS paid if the PalmOS and Palm Economy continue to provide plenty of revenue to ACCESS.

Our idea of "killing" PalmSource may not match up with Access'. For instance, converting the company to make mobile phone OSes would effectively kill the platform, but Access might see it as a reasonable way to grow their market.

The huge premium can only be justified if the massive palm developer community is *leveraged*, and that means plenty of support and reassurance for Palm developers.

For those that are left, maybe. But if Access did want to turn PalmOS into mobile phone software, they really wouldn't be interested in keeping independant developers. Carriers would be their customers, and carriers don't want people developing software they don't control.

It is highly unlikely that ACCESS paid out this amount of money expecting PalmLinux to ship late... and you can guarantee that PalmSource had to "open the kimono" for a deal like this and show precisely what they were developing and what milestones remained.

Assuming that they have any interest in PalmLinux, as opposed to CMS, Garnet, or even just PalmSource's coders. You're assuming facts not in evidence, to wit, that Access wants to keep running PalmSource exactly the way it is.

In fact, given that an acquirer likes to show a return on an asset as soon as possible, this acquisition most likely means an accelerated development path for PalmLinux.

As Marty said, that's not always the way it works. (Though I must say, thank god for the Japanese and their casual relationship with ROI. If US companies were less obsessed with getting their money back in 6 months, we'd have nationwide WiFi and colonies on Mars by now.)

"Purchased at a premium" means that the acquired asset was worth *more* than what the market estimated. ACCESSS figures that PalmLinux is worth essentially double what the market was estimating: this can only be a good thing.

Again, you're making the assumption that all the people involved are infallible, and that everything will go perfectly. I can't count the number of stories I know about companies paying out vast sums of money to buy other companies for far more than real value. Often, companies in a weak position will make themselves appear more valuable than they really are in order to try and get bought out. You really need to read Scott Adams.

Profitability is great, but in this case he's right that the Japanese take a longer-term view of things. It's not all about getting your money back in 6 months or the project's canceled, the way many US companies operate.

Profitability is great, but in this case he's right that the Japanese take a longer-term view of things. It's not all about getting your money back in 6 months or the project's canceled, the way many US companies operate.

Actually, I was joking, Adam. I am fully aware of the traditional Japanese corporate culture (which is beginning to gravitate towards the American "Instant Gratification" school of thought, by the way).

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

The Palm eCONomy = Communism™

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

How PalmSource is REALLY doing: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8026#110958

Ah. Sorry, then.

Japanese corporate culture (which is beginning to gravitate towards the American "Instant Gratification" school of thought, by the way).

Eew.

Dr Opinion said:

Not at that sort of premium.

Again, you're assuming things. What the price says is that Access thinks they're getting something good. Nothing about that says that they're looking at the classic PalmOS.

In the fantasy world of the m$ shill, PalmSource was an asset with no value, and as such might have been bought up at a massive *discount* by a recycler hoping to extract some value from the aluminum trays in the cafeteria.

In the real world, things don't work that way. For a company to be valued less than the total of its cash on hand plus hard assets would be... well, highly improbable. The fact that PalmSource was in a terrible market position couldn't drive the price much below that threshold anyway.

In real life the management and directors of PalmSource drove a hard bargain on price: they know the value of their assets, their development pipeline, and the incredible palm economy -- a far more vibrant, entreprenurial, and creative community than m$ has.

The "Palm economy" isn't worth what you seem to think it is. The developer and buyer base has been shrinking right along with the marketshare, in no small part due to the fact that the platform has fallen behind its competitors, and most of the really innovative new software toys are happening elsewhere.

This is easy to demonstrate: if m$ wince was truely secure in it's future, the monopolist wouldn't need to pay shills to troll palm forums!

Which they don't. Paranoia leads you to believe that anything negative about Palm/PalmSource must be the work of evil, evil Microsoft, since everyone knows Windows is satan and Palm is infallible.

Apparently ACCESS also see the *same* value in the PalmSource asset, since they agreed on this incredible *premium*.

Facts not in evidence. Obviously Access sees value in PSRC, but you assume that they see the existing OS as the value because that's what you want them to see. Some of us, who aren't automatically biased, would like a clear-cut answer from them as to what the future of the Palm platform is.

Classic shill FUD. Thanks. :)

The PDA market has grown since the days when palm was the only show in town, yet the Palm OS maintains the largest installed base and developer community by multiples. m$ can only wish.

Despite the huge lead the Palm OS continues to innovate, to take the battle to the next platforms: smartphones and media players.

Considering the amount of cash m$ has sunk, it is pathetic that the wince platform continually trails behind in terms of innovation, constantly copying Palm. Yes, there are wince devices with higher res screens, but that's hardly what the unbiased would call "innovation". I'm looking forward to a day when m$ "invents" PDAs with non-volatile memory, smartphones with keyboards, and devices with hard drives built in. Wow. Just imagine.

> "in no small part due to the fact that the platform has fallen behind its competitors, and most of the really innovative new software toys are happening elsewhere"

Yeah, just look at the amazing developer buzz around Symbian. Cool.

But really, how long do you think wince developers are going to stick around once they realize that m$ will not need two tablet PC O/Ss moving forwards? Obviously wince is doomed: its developer base is tiny compared to either palm, linux, or that of the PC: m$ must be planning to eliminate it. Current PDAs are almost powerful enough to run PC-style operating systems like linux or XP for tablet PCs right now. I'd give wince a year at most.

And judging from the way m$ has treated the wince development community historically, anyone committed to the platform when it is dropped will be left whistling in the wind. :)

------
"People who like M$ products tend to be insecure crowd-following newbies lacking in experience and imagination."

Don't be an idiot.

The PDA market has grown since the days when palm was the only show in town

On this, congratulations, you're actually correct. Huzzah!

yet the Palm OS maintains the largest installed base and developer community by multiples.

This is misleading. Palm's estimates of their "installed base" are based on EVERY UNIT they've ever sold, and assuming that they're all still in active service. And nobody disagrees that Palm has sold a lot of units over the years, but nobody wins a horserace by saying "Gee, didn't I do so well last week?" You have to keep moving units, and while Palm is still the #1 single manufacturer, the marketshare is moving very much in the wrong direction.

Despite the huge lead

I take it that by "huge lead," you mean "the other guy sells two units to our one?" Hint: If you're not competing in the current market, you're not competing. You don't get to take nostalgia breaks.

the Palm OS continues to innovate

I must have missed that memo where Palm OS got a modern development framework, multitasking, native flash memory support, push email, a modern browser, VOIP...

Considering the amount of cash m$ has sunk, it is pathetic that the wince platform continually trails behind in terms of innovation, constantly copying Palm.

And you have the sheer unmitigated gall to accuse me of lying? What, pray tell, has Palm "innovated" in the last few years? One handed navigation? Hardly the most original thing in the world, considering that not only was it Handspring that made it, but they basically took it from cell phones. If anything, Palm is copying Windows--fast processors, high res screens, Bluetooth, WiFi, flash memory, etc..

The degree to which you have to twist reality to come up with this is astonishing. If there were a realism police, you'd be in chains.

Yes, there are wince devices with higher res screens, but that's hardly what the unbiased would call "innovation". I'm looking forward to a day when m$ "invents" PDAs with non-volatile memory, smartphones with keyboards, and devices with hard drives built in. Wow. Just imagine.

Uh, there have been devices with non-volatile memory and keyboards for about 2-3 years now. Try to keep up. As for hard drives, any PocketPC with a CompactFlash slot can use one, dating back to 2001. There are also Windows devices with built in hard drives in sizes up to 20 GB. They're called Portable Media Players, and while I think that they're ridiculous, they exist, and yes, they were here well before the LifeDrive.

Palm didn't "innovate" anything about flash memory, hard drives, or keyboards either. Sharp had both flash memory and HDs years before Palm. They had keyboards too, and Handspring had keyboards on their smartphones.

But really, how long do you think wince developers are going to stick around once they realize that m$ will not need two tablet PC O/Ss moving forwards?

You've been listening way too much to Jeff Kirvin. That man will rot your brain. Tablet PCs are ten times too bulky, expensive, and delicate to even consider being a pocketable system in the next several years. This fantasy that Tablet PCs are going to replace handhelds is just that--fantast. In 3-5 years, you might be able to build something as cheap and durable as an Axim running on Windows XP with a decent processor and storage. But that's hardly a trouser-crapping event for Windows developers. By the time XP handhelds become practical, they will have had to update their apps fifteen or twenty times already.

Obviously wince is doomed: its developer base is tiny compared to either palm, linux, or that of the PC:

Yeah, compare a handheld developer base to the PC. That's logical. In any event, Windows Mobile has a quite adequate number of developers--certainly at least as many as the actual developers that Palm has, once you subtract from that 400,000 figure the number who put in an email address so that they could download the emulator. Oh, you did realize that PalmSource counts them as "developers," right? I think that I'm actually 3 or 4 of those developers. Funny how that number hasn't changed upwards in the last couple of years, isn't it. I would think that with a platform that's "dominating" the market, they would be attracting new developers.

Reminder: it was a Windows developer who created TCPMP. Show a little gratitude.

m$ must be planning to eliminate it.

So you're a psychic now? I can make the same argument about Palm--they've only got 2-3 licensees, they must be planning to can it. Oh, Microsoft has 40+ licensees? Hmm.

This is the same tired, stupid line that's been going around here for years. You guys think that if you just ignore Windows, if you put your fingers in your ears and hum really loud, it will go away. IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. They already own two thirds of the market, and the WM division is finally approaching profitability. You really think that Microsoft is going to just take their toys and go home? It didn't work when Microsoft had 10% of the market. It's not going to work with them having 65% of the market.

The sad irony is that if Palm themselves hadn't adopted this very same "strategy," they might have stayed on top.

Current PDAs are almost powerful enough to run PC-style operating systems like linux or XP for tablet PCs right now. I'd give wince a year at most.

Not even close. Do you really think that XP would run on a 600 MHz RISC processor with 64 MB RAM and 128 MB of storage? Hell, XP requires at least 128 MB of RAM and hundreds of megs of storage just for the OS, let alone running any programs. To realistically run it as an actual desktop, you're talking about doubling or tripling the processor speed, 256 MB of RAM, and at least 2 GB storage. You really think that current PDAs have all that?

Simple reasoning knocks you down. You need to stop listening to Jeff Kirvin.

And even if we did play with your ludicrous scenario, what changes? Then Windows would have an even bigger advantage in the mobile space, since they can say "Runs Windows XP!" You know how big a selling point that would be? It would be huge. You're fantasizing about something that would give Microsoft another 20% of marketshare.

Lefty said:
Gee, and here I thought we'd been stating pretty clearly what the future of the Palm [OS] platform is for the better part of a year now.

Which means nothing when you've just been bought out. Paying an outrageously high price for a company, then killing the supposed next generation product sure would be stupid, but I've seen FAR stupider things occur.

Fortunately, Access has issued a statement saying that they intend to continue licensing and supporting Garnet, as well as continuing development on Linux. Apparently, they agreed with me that a clarification was neccessary. Thanks for backing me up, Access.

Surur

BTW, try some numbers if you want anyone accept svrontis to believe you.

You are certainly the expert when it comes to 'complete lack of substance'.

No wonder you been banned from posting over at 1src.com. Still I see you are continuing you efforts here. Of course, whether it is at 1src.com or here, your FUD is always as boring as it is irrelevant.

I believe the statement was that "existing deployments" of Garnet will continue to be supported. This is to say that we're not going to be pulling the rug out from any current projects or shipping devices.

You asked about "the future of the Palm [OS] platform," not the past.

Love,

Lefty
Minister of Fun (or Else!), Palmsource Core Technologies

Surur

a) Where is comes from (I understand its backported from Cobalt)
b) Why it causes so many problems with third party software.
c) Whether the current system will carry over to POS Linux (ie. no real filesystem, database approach, SDRAM being mirrored to non-volatile memory)
d) What made Palm think they could use a HDD for NV memory. (surely Palm consulted PSRC on this).

Surur

Gee, didn't we decide to take that out...?

I am Jack's rolling eyes.

Love,

Lefty
Minister of Fun (or Else!), PalmSource Core Technologies

By "existing deployments, including Palm OS Garnet," I read that they don't intend to discontinue their existing OS for the forseeable future. You're also missing the bit of the statement where they say "We really don't expect any changes in the relationships that we have with licensees." To me, that says that PalmSource will be continuing as they have been, and the buyout won't seriously hamper any new devices.

This is just about the point where I get to mention that the Kyocera 7135, a rather aged Palm OS 4-based phone, has outsold all of the Pocket PC/Windows Mobile/etc. phones made by all of Microsoft's licensees, put together.

That's more that grossly inaccurate, it's just flat out wrong. This is a myth that the PalmSource people started. The 7135 barely even made it off the ground, and it was never a good seller. It came out far too late, running OS 4.1, and was thrown up against the Treo 600 running OS 5 and the massive PR campaign that came with the Treo. I would be shocked if the 7135 sold more than 50,000 units.

WM Smartphones sell about a million units a year, give or take. PPC phones sell another million. Care to explain how a Palm phone that was antiquated when it was released and hasn't been available for years managed to outsell all Windows phones? Even the Treo 650 only sells about 1.2 million a year.

Penguin said:
How'd you do that? You're in a thread discussing the modern browser addition. Didn't you know that Linux has had multitasking from day one?

Netfront isn't available for Palm OS except by copying it from a Clie. Palm OS does not have multi-tasking: PalmLinux counts for nothing until it's in the hands of a user. Remember, Cobalt was supposed to have multitasking too. Nor does the current version of PalmOS have native flash memory support--it was hacked in aftermarket.

Surur: perhaps someone else can correct me, but as I recall, the flash memory support in Garnet actually wasn't backported from Cobalt, but was original code done by Palm(One)'s people.

Lefty (the Great and Terrible)
Minister of Fun (or Else!), Palm OS Core Technologies

Mr. Schlesinger, you PalmSource people need to cut the B.S. once and for all. Your PalmLinux development timeline suggests to me that once again it will be too little, far too late. Do you really have the engineering resources to deliver PalmLinux in time for the market to give a damn, David? I don't think so. What I'm seeing is the same arrogance and the same mistakes as I saw with PalmOS 6 (Cobalt) development. Nothing has changed except who's calling the shots. (Looks like the Holy Be Engineers rubbed off on you...)

Its all fine and dandy to make casual statements like "The future is "Palm OS for Linux"; (the majority of) "Protein"—i.e. Cobalt—developer APIs will be supported, (the majority of) Linux APIs will be exposed, 68K compatibility will be delivered via PACE, as on Garnet." But it's another thing to actually DELIVER on those promises. And by "deliver" I mean within a timeframe that doesn't leave you holding a product BeOS-style that the market could not care less about.

I've been advocating for a switch to PalmLinux for around 4 years now, but at this point in time, even I have my doubts that PalmSource has what it takes to deliver. So far NOTHING I've been told about your current position on the development timeline reassures me that things will be completed in time for PalmLinux to matter in the marketplace. The sense of urgency seems to be lacking. Mr. Fouts has played his dumba$$ routine to the hilt in response to my posts here over the past three weeks. I've tried to be restrained in my responses. My assertion that PalmSource engineers need to be working "overtime" on completing PalmLinux ASAP still stands. Can you tell us with any honesty when you estimate PalmLinux will be go GM? March, 2007 seems to be the earliest date likely. That's over 6 months too late.

TVoR

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

The Palm eCONomy = Communism™

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

How PalmSource is REALLY doing: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8026#110958

Well David, this is just about the point where I get to say, "That's a load of B.S." Instead of parroting the manure they've been feeding you at PalmSource, why don't you post something that's actually TRUE? If you believe what you said about the Kyocera sales, please post a link corroborating your statement. Otherwise, please retract it and apologize for spouting such nonsense here. You know better than that, David.

AdamaDBrown wrote: I must have missed that memo where Palm OS got a modern development framework, multitasking, native flash memory support, push email, a modern browser, VOIP...

So PenguinPowered spews "Didn't you know that Linux has had multitasking from day one?"

And then David Schlesinger adds Gee, didn't we decide to take that out...?

I am Jack's rolling eyes.

Love,

Lefty
Minister of Fun (or Else!), PalmSource Core Technologies

Love the sarcasm, David. Here's some more: Gee, I didn't know PalmLinux was already shipping on available devices. If you're going to post here, at least try to be courteous and address the issues that are actually raised by members of the community. We are the people buying your products and advocating for PalmOS in The Real World. Some of us here are personally responsible for hundreds (and thousands) of sales of PalmOS devices having been made. The smarmy smarta$$ routine reflects poorly on PalmSource. You and Marty could learn a thing or two about defending PalmSource in public without coming across as utter a-holes. I hope I don't have to say that again.

Your Pal,

TVoR

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

The Palm eCONomy = Communism™

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

How PalmSource is REALLY doing: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8026#110958

I hope you are not disavowing NVFS. Palm seems to insist that its your baby.

1 Where can developers learn more about NVFS? The NVFS technology was developed by PalmSource.

And you know full well what I mean by traditional multi-tasking. Do you guys specialize in playing dumb? Cobalt, with its single process, multiple crash-vulnerable background threads does NOT do traditional multi-tasking.

I'm sure people would love to hear if POL will continue this tradition of making it tougher for developers to write for your platform.

Surur

Love,

Lefty
Minister of Fun (or Else!), PalmSource Core Technologies

Question: Will POL just be Cobalt on Linux? If not, how not?

Regarding paying for information. Guess what, the people who buy your OS pay your salary. As you refuse to be forthcoming, maybe they should stop buying POS devices.

Oh I forgot, people have decided to do this already. The arrogance of some people.

http://www.canalys.com/pr/2005/r2005071.htm

Surur

NVFS was done by PalmSource, with a little extra work by Palm. PalmSource's Ben Combee apologized profusely for the NVFS Debacle at DevCon.

TVoR, Inc.

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

The Palm eCONomy = Communism™

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

How PalmSource is REALLY doing: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8026#110958

Poor Skippy, confused again. I'm not defending PalmSource, Skippy. I'm merely having a lot of fun pointing out the gaping holes in your arguments.

Marty Fouts
Lead Linux Lizard
PalmSource Core Technology Department

I bet Motorola wish they'd known what you knew. ;-)

I'm still waiting for the mythical "color HandEra."

Well, somebody is. Marty didn't call Surur "Skippy," he wondered whether the former might be developing similar comprehension problems to the latter. Case in point, I guess.

...manager in charge...

Director, thanks.

...Apple refugee...

Nuh-uh. Left under my own steam, my choice, not theirs.

...actually a nice guy in real life despite the role he plays on TV

This, for sure, is an absolute falsehood.

Love,

Lefty (the Great and Terrible)
Minister of Fun (or Else!), PalmSource Core Technologies

PS. "I think that's the worst thing I've ever heard. How marvelous!"

I am absolutely, believe-you-me, the very last person you want to be misquoting movie lines to...

Love,

Lefty (the Great and Terrible)
Minister of Fun (or Else!), PalmSource Core Technologies
Owner of More DVDs Than You

stonemirrorThat's not a very meaningful set of questions, but here's a stab at concrete answers: "No"; "lots of ways". Beyond that, there's general information available on the PalmSource web site. If you can manage to come up with a better-framed question, perhaps I'll have a go at answering it...

Well, the people who "buy our OS" and "pay my salary" are our licensees, as I've been saying. There's plenty of public information on our "Palm OS for Linux" plans up on the web site.

Surur, I'm no software developer/linux guru/codemonkey either, but your questions do sound like you are mixing up the parts of what normal people refer to as the OS, parts like the kernel, API's, UI, etc. To be fair, I think guys like Lefty and Marty know very well what the common misunderstandings are and could "adjust" to our inaccuracies, but why should they? What they are doing is technical and so the technicalities are important. And in your case, you came right in and started to sound like TVOR with your accusations. Why in the world would you expect them to lob you softballs when you want to play hardball? You can't eat your cake and have it too.

If we want to have anyone like Marty, Lefty and Diane giving us any information at all, we need to show at least a modicum of common courtesy. Otherwise, we can let this forum just be TVOR's soapbox and we all lose out on the range of information that potentially makes this an interesting place to be. Please, I'm tired of only seeing TVOR's endless stream of conspiracy theories. We got it already! Yes, there is something "interesting" about them. But can't we have at least a little of something else as well?


_______________________
"Does ANYONE not realize that Palm will buy PalmSource?" The_Voice_of_Reason @ 9/4/2005 4:11:35 PM
PalmSource Acquired By ACCESS Posted By: Ryan on Thursday, September 08, 2005 9:57:19 PM

I'm still waiting for the mythical "color HandEra."

No need to condescend, I'm more than happy to cross vocabularies with you at any point.

Did you catch that?

Well, let's see. You hit upon a fairly tortured and inobvious reading of what Marty was saying purely to use it as the basis for a free-floating snipe.

Either that, or you simply completely misread what Marty wrote and used your misunderstanding as the basis for a free-floating snipe.

I hear William of Occam sharpening up his razor, I think.

Love,

Lefty (the Great and Terrible)
Minister of Fun (or Else!), PalmSource Core Technologies

Indeed. That's why she's occupied architecting complex stuff. Me, I just get to manage big projects, meet with licensees and others, and generally bring joy (and occasional terror) to those around me.

It's a living.

Love,

Lefty (the Great and Terrible)
Minister of Fun (or Else!), PalmSource Core Technologies

Please don't call me an engineer. ;) I did my undergraduate work at an engineering school, and believe me, all claims to the contrary aside, software developers are not engineers. (Yeah, I know, swimming against the tide and all that.)

Of course, considering what it is that I do for PalmSource, software developer is an overstatement as well. Just think of me as the lead linux lizard, sometimes called oohlong.

Marty Fouts
Lead Linux Lizard
PalmSource Core Technology Department

Excuse me, but that's bulls--t. I know sales figures about as well as anyone, and you're flat out wrong. Now try again. Post a link to actual official sales figures showing this miraculous surge, or admit that you were parroting without knowing the facts. Come on. I bet it would feel real good to make me shut up.

Kyocera's still selling the 7135, by the way.

Yes, but Verizon isn't, so what Kyocera is doing is kind of irrelevant, isn't it? Unless you think 2 million people a year are buying the 7135 on Alltel, Western Wireless, and US Cellular.

Sam said:
I bet Motorola wish they'd known what you knew. ;-)

Moto would have been a disaster area anyway. Look at the

Dr. Clueless Opinion said:
AdamaDBrown: Constant and tiresome wince advocate. Unable to leave any positive comment regarding palm OS standing -- on a palm site? Obvious use of pro-wince FUD in response to any and all comments regarding palm OS. Obvious and transparent shill. :)

Boy, no part of reality penetrates that bubble of pure belief you surround yourself with, does it?

If I'm so off base, you should be able to look up the facts and prove me wrong, correct? Correct? Please, I dare you. The reality of the situation is that my statements are usually correct, and if they're not, I admit it. If I sometimes sound like I'm Palm-bashing, it's because sometimes it's warranted, or because it's neccessary to get through to some of the people here who don't get that it's not 2000 anymore. So I say again, if I'm wrong, prove it.

The irony is that the last time I was accused of being a paid shill, it was because I was defending the Palm LifeDrive. The great thing about trying to be fair is that then, you can get his by rocks thrown from both sides. Though my own tendancy towards being a Devil's advocate in any given situation doesn't really do me any favors.

That's an oddly north-american list of providers.

Maybe that's why you're confused about Kyocera sales levels? You've left out the largest cellphone markets in the world?

Marty Fouts
Lead Linux Lizard
PalmSource Core Technology Department

I don't believe any of your licensees have either...

More importantly at the time, not only was Linux in a substantially more primitive state, but the legalities of working within the GPL were even less well-understood than they are today (when you can still ask the same question of Richard Stallman and Eben Moglen and get two different answers...)

Moto's lawyers must have liked the answers they got. :-)

It's quite possibly a contributing facto, as is the apparent belief that Kyocera is no longer still selling the 7135...

S'okay; they keep sending us checks, I'm told...

Love,

Lefty (the Great and Terrible)
Minister of Fun (or Else!), PalmSource Core Technologies

Since you've never apparently bothered to treat anyone with any, this is not terribly surprising.

If we post here, it's as private citizens, not as representatives of PalmSource. If you want to talk to a representative of PalmSource, call our number and ask for the PR department.

We're in the course of an ongoing project, and as I've repeatedly pointed out, what we can say and can't say is going to be limited, by confidentiality concerns at the very least. We're also (just in case you'd forgotten) in the midst of an aquisition, which furthers induces us to be careful about what we say. Don't like that? Sorry. Can't help you.

Nor are we here (or are we obligated) to "explain the failure of the platform" to you, any more than you are here to explain your failure to stop beating your wife to me.

I'm certainly willing to share what information I can in the face of reasonable discourse (which would seem to leave you and the Mouth of Fantasy out); don't expect me to fall all over myself to be helpful in the face of insult, attempted rumor-mongering, and name-calling.

I'm just funny that way.

I don't like that, see?

Love,

Lefty
Minister of Fun (or Else!), PalmSource Core Technologies

PS. Just to show you what a decent fellow I can be, I can tell you (as I told folks at the Developers Conference) that we will be using Linux's process model as-is; we will not be grafting the Cobalt process model onto Linux.