Palm Reports Q4 and Record FY 2006 Results

Posted By: Ryan Thursday, June 29, 2006 1:10:10 PM

New Palm Inc Logo ~ Click for largerPalm Inc today reported that revenue in its fourth quarter of fiscal year 2006, ended June 2, totaled $403.1 million, up 20 percent from the year-ago quarter. For the full fiscal year 2006, revenue totaled $1.6 billion, up 24 percent from fiscal year 2005.

"Treo smartphone sales surpassed an important milestone -- $1 billion in revenue for the fiscal year," said Ed Colligan, Palm president and chief executive officer. "Our product engine is firing on all cylinders as evidenced by our recent introductions of both the Treo 700w and the Treo 700p, each of which offers a different operating system, 3G radios and robust application suites, and we delivered these products to multiple carriers simultaneously. We enter fiscal year 2007 as a strong leader, capable of delivering on the rich potential of mobile computing on a global scale."

Palm shipped approximately 4.7 million mobile-computing solutions during fiscal year 2006, including 2.3 million Treo smartphones and 2.5 million Palm handheld computers. During the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2006, Palm shipped approximately 623,000 smartphones and 495,000 handheld computers. To date, Palm has shipped almost 36 million units.

Fourth Quarter FY 2006 Results

Net income for the quarter was $27.2 million, or $0.25 per diluted share. This compares to net income for the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2005 of $17.7 million, or $0.17 per diluted share, and net income for the third quarter of fiscal year 2006 of $29.9 million, or $0.28 per diluted share.

Net income in the fourth fiscal quarter, measured on a non-GAAP basis, totaled $30.6 million, or $0.29 per diluted share, excluding the effects of amortization of intangible assets and deferred stock-based compensation, legal settlements, restructuring charges, the related income tax provision and the partial reversal of our valuation allowance against our deferred tax assets. This compares to non-GAAP net income in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2005 of $19.2 million, or $0.19 per diluted share, which excluded the effects of amortization of intangible assets and deferred stock-based compensation, employee separation costs and restructuring charges.

Fiscal Year 2006 Results

Revenue for the full fiscal year 2006 was $1.6 billion, up 24 percent from the $1.3 billion reported in fiscal year 2005. Net income for fiscal year 2006 was $336.2 million, or $3.19 per diluted share, compared with net income of $66.4 million, or $0.65 per diluted share, for fiscal year 2005. Non-GAAP net income for fiscal year 2006 -- excluding the effects of amortization of intangible assets and deferred stock-based compensation, legal settlements, restructuring charges, the related income tax provision and the reversal of our valuation allowance against our deferred tax assets -- was $88.5 million, or $0.85 per diluted share. That compares with a fiscal year 2005 non-GAAP net income -- excluding the effects of amortization of intangible assets and deferred stock-based compensation, employee separation costs and restructuring charges -- of $78.9 million, or $0.77 per diluted share.

With respect to the fiscal year 2007 outlook, Colligan added, "As we deliver new products and expand internationally, we expect growth to accelerate throughout the year."

Fiscal Year 2007 Guidance

  • Revenue growth is expected to be between 20 percent and 25 percent;
  • Gross margin on a GAAP basis is expected to be between 33.8 percent and 34.8 percent, and, on a non-GAAP basis, between 34 percent and 35 percent;
  • As a percent of revenue, sales and marketing expenses are expected to be between 13.1 percent and 13.6 percent on a GAAP basis and between 12.5 percent and 13.0 percent on a non-GAAP basis;
  • As a percent of revenue, research and development expenses are expected to be between 10.0 percent and 10.5 percent on a GAAP basis, and on a non-GAAP basis, between 9.2 percent and 9.7 percent;
  • As a percent of revenue, general and administrative expenses are expected to be less than 3 percent on a GAAP and non-GAAP basis;
  • Operating margin is expected to be in the range of 7.5 percent to 7.8 percent on a GAAP basis and between 9.0 percent and 9.3 percent on a non-GAAP basis;
  • The tax rate on a GAAP basis is expected to be 42 percent and, on a non-GAAP basis, 40 percent; and
  • FAS 123R stock-compensation expense, before taxes, is expected to be between $34 million and $38 million.

Q1 Fiscal Year 2007 Guidance:

  • Revenue is expected to be between $380 million and $385 million;
  • Gross margin is expected to be in the range of 34.7 percent and 35.2 percent on a GAAP basis and between 35.0 percent and 35.5 percent on a non-GAAP basis;
  • Operating expenses on a GAAP basis are expected to be in the range of $113 million to $114 million and on a non-GAAP basis between $105 million and $106 million;
  • Earnings per diluted share are expected to be in the range of $0.13 to $0.14 on a GAAP basis and $0.18 to $0.19 on a non-GAAP basis; and
  • FAS 123R stock-compensation expense, before taxes, is expected to be between $9.0 million and $9.5 million.

Source: Palm Inc Press Release

Article Comments

 (85 comments)

The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. PalmInfocenter is not responsible for them in any way.
Please Login or register here to add your comments.

Start a new Comment Down View Full Comment Thread

My notes from the conference call...

Surur @ 6/29/2006 5:36:18 PM # Q
Interesting points - Initial strong sales, then slow sales for the Treo 700w. Key changes made to European carriers on their request (? WIFI and 64 MB ram?) . He spends a lot of time dissing the Moto Q for using a non-touchscreen and smartphone OS.

He also notes there will be 2 new ODM's to make Palms, and that after the new 2 Treos, there will be more devices on their heels.

Treo 700p sales also slow, with high inventory, but he attributes it to timing.

Confirms 2 new phones later this year, with sales from Europe adding a lot to revenue.

He speaks of costs of R&D in software increasing, ? due to PalmLinux? Speaks of "build business for long term."

No Treo 650 to Europe after June 30 2006 due to environmental reasons. No replacement even before August 2006.

European volumes of 650 "not very significant" however.

Moto Q has lead to drop in volume of Treo 700 sales, May 2006 less sell-through. Has now improved again however, ? not to same level?

700w relied upon to allow expand internationally and expand into enterprise.

Nitro and Lenon wont be carier exclusives.

Surur

They said I only argued for the sake of arguing, but after an hour I convinced them they were wrong...

RE: My notes from the conference call...
cervezas @ 6/29/2006 5:49:52 PM # Q
Thanks, Surer. So he actually mentioned Nitro and Lennon? If so, I'm curious how he described them.

David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog
RE: My notes from the conference call...
Surur @ 6/29/2006 5:55:02 PM # Q

No. He spoke of future products when asked during the telephone calls afterward. The analysts asked whether the new products would be restricted to carriers or not. He said by the end of the year they would be on multiple carriers. He did speak of UMTS devices and Europe, so we know its the Lenon in all but name. He spoke very little of the Nitro, and even specifically refused to answer a question about hitting lower price points.

Surur

They said I only argued for the sake of arguing, but after an hour I convinced them they were wrong...

RE: My notes from the conference call...
SeldomVisitor @ 6/29/2006 7:11:06 PM # Q
I missed the price point comment - if he said "ain't hitting lower price points" then the Q smacked them upside the head big time.

RE: My notes from the conference call...
freakout @ 6/29/2006 7:24:36 PM # Q
So perhaps no "Lowrider" after all then? That's a shame - Treos are still too expensive for the average consumer, and PalmOS is perfectly suited to such lower-end devices.

Tim
I apologise for any and all emoticons that appear in my posts. You may shoot them on sight.
Treo 270 ---> Treo 650
RE: My notes from the conference call...
Surur @ 6/29/2006 7:43:26 PM # Q

It was more like he did not want to give away information that would be useful to his competitors. I assume he would rather want to surprise them with the price-point, not to mention pre-announcing a (lower) price point will cause people to wait, damaging current inventory levels (not that this stopped the Moto Q people from talking about a $50 Q)

Surur

They said I only argued for the sake of arguing, but after an hour I convinced them they were wrong...

RE: My notes from the conference call...
freakout @ 6/29/2006 8:13:10 PM # Q
Ahhh. That makes sense then.

Did he offer any explanation for the drop-off in 700w sales?

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

RE: My notes from the conference call...
Scott R @ 6/29/2006 9:28:01 PM # Q
I didn't hear this, but based on your comments this would align with my hunch about 700w sales. I suspect that they're initially strong sales volumes were artificial; they were the result of Verizon's exclusivity agreement requiring them to purchase xx number of Treos/month and didn't necessarily equate to them actually selling that many to consumers. The Q intro no doubt hit them in the stomach.

I still wonder what this rumored "low priced" Treo will offer. They really can't afford to drop any features and remain competitive feature-wise with the Q or even other feature-phones. Us geeks like open platforms like Palm OS and WM5 smartphones, but the general public doesn't think or care about whether or not a phone they like the looks of is capable of installing freeware/shareware off the web.

Palm's greatest advantage right now is that the competition still sucks. Microsoft churns out WM upgrades at a decent rate, but usability/efficiency is just as bad as it was with PPC 2000. Yet Palm is getting "suckier" with each release. The 700p offers worse performance and usability as compared to the 650 and the 650 had some step backwards performance and usability-wise as compared to Handspring's Treo 600. After 18 months of R&D, the 700p is a sad upgrade from the 650.

Will an all-new player come onto the scene soon with something truly special, or will we be stuck in the dark ages of mobile communication for the forseeable future?

http://Tapland.com
- Tapwave Zodiac News, Reviews, & Discussion -

RE: My notes from the conference call...
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 6/29/2006 11:01:52 PM # Q
Will an all-new player come onto the scene soon with something truly special, or will we be stuck in the dark ages of mobile communication for the forseeable future?

Nokia and Sony Ericsson are about to hurt Palm. Bad.

Stay tuned, Kiddies...


TVoR

RE: My notes from the conference call...
Foo Fighter @ 6/29/2006 11:40:31 PM # Q
Palm is about to get smacked with a double whammy. The Moto Q smacked his company upside the head, but wait til he sees the effect Nokia's E61 is going to have on his bottom...line. And in between those two market leading devices, what has Palm to offer customers; a tired but iconic design that is rapidly becoming a clunky brick among a sea of compellingly sleeker sexier smartphones. He can't even compete on price anymore because both the Q and E61 are selling for far less than Palm is charging for their products. And it's going to get even worse if Moto CEO Ed Zander is telling the truth when stating that, by year's end, carriers will begin offering the Q for a mere $50 (subsidized)...oh God I don't even want to think about it.

-------------------------------
PocketFactory, www.pocketfactory.com
Elitist Snob, www.elitistsnob.com
RE: My notes from the conference call...
craigdts @ 6/30/2006 12:01:40 AM # Q
Moto would be nuts to offer it a $50, what do they want to kill all their other phones (do they have any others ones?). That would be a sign of weakness not a strength. Is that what it is worth? $50?
RE: My notes from the conference call...
Surur @ 6/30/2006 2:24:47 AM # Q
Did he offer any explanation for the drop-off in 700w sales?

He said the 700w was aimed at enterprise, that the early blip was due to consumer early adopters, but that enterprise is still trialling the device, but few have decided to adopt it, although he was very hopeful of this still occurring, and that enterprise may have been waiting to compare it to other upcoming competitors (like the Q I guess).

Surur

They said I only argued for the sake of arguing, but after an hour I convinced them they were wrong...

RE: My notes from the conference call...
SeldomVisitor @ 6/30/2006 7:45:06 AM # Q
I would suggest that:

(1) The TREO 700W literally sold to early-adopters.

(2) The TREO 700P came out and those early-adopters bought it INSTEAD.

(3) Based on weak anecdotal evidence of TreoCentral posts about same, the TREO 700W was returned en mass and replaced by the TREO 700P (or Q!).

The CEO noted the 700W was being met by competition during "evaluation stage" by MORE than one competitor:

== "...Third, I’d say, definitely related to a number of
== competitive announcements. We can’t dismiss those
== completely..."

(BTW, I do not vouch for the accuracy of that quote but it's at least close to what the CEO said during the CC Q&A)

=======

The effect of all the above is, IMHO:

(1) TREO 700W selling like gangbusters on intro to early-adopter geeks.

(2) Motorola Q causing TREO 700W sales to stop dead.

(3) TREO 700P intro causing PalmOS geeks to buy like crazy giving an apparent "increase in sell-through".

(4) And possibly considerable returns by early-adopter geeks of the TREO 700W as they go for the 700P instead - this would cause weird "sales" numbers, BTW, as 700W "sales" stay on the books even though the 700Ws have been returned and replaced - the accounting for those returns is delayed some unspecified amount.

RE: My notes from the conference call...
cervezas @ 6/30/2006 8:44:16 AM # Q
What network operator lets you use a subsidized phone for a few months and then just return it in exchange it for a new one?

David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog
RE: My notes from the conference call...
ChiA @ 6/30/2006 8:56:51 AM # Q
Beersy said "What network operator lets you use a subsidized phone for a few months and then just return it in exchange it for a new one?"

Umm yes, good question. On reflection it's probably so that the carrier keeps the customer happy and making calls ie a nice regular income. After all why do they subsidize the phone in the first place? Because they'll make the money back over the two years of your contract from all your calls, data and text.

Carriers probably buy in bulk and I doubt the Treo 700 costs them $649 per unit.

Even if they do, Verizon charges $549 for handset on one year contract + $35 activation + $79 for the cheapest data plan I could find. Therefore they milk at least $1532 out of you in a year.

If they swap the handset okay they're $549 down but still squeeze $983 out of you and retained a customer much more likely to renew their contract and therefore maintain that $983 of income in the years to come.

I doubt they'll be even $549 down as no doubt that rejected handset will be refurbished and resold at a discount to some other "victim".



Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the President.
- President Theodore Roosevelt

RE: My notes from the conference call...
AdamaDBrown @ 6/30/2006 11:01:30 AM # Q
(3) Based on weak anecdotal evidence of TreoCentral posts about same, the TREO 700W was returned en mass and replaced by the TREO 700P (or Q!).

(Rolls eyes)

RE: My notes from the conference call...
hkklife @ 6/30/2006 11:10:30 AM # Q
All I know is that, including my own 700P, I purchased, help purchase or influeced the purchase of five 700Ps at the local Verizon store.

The store manager also told me that the 700W had gotten off to an amazingly fast start before quickly dying down after about 6-8 weeks. The manager also said that the 700P hit the ground running and, as of last week, was off to a far better start sales-wise and returns-wise, than the 700W had been during its first month. I also was told that the Q had very strong initial sales numbers but also a lot of returns when people upgrading from a 650 or a BB or even a RAZR realized the Q was jack of many trades & master of none.

I think Verizon was actually planning on EOLing the Treo 650 and carrying no further POS devices. *Something* made them change their minds at the last minute--perhaps the continued string of profitable Palm quarters or Access' buyout of PalmSource? Remember, all we heard was Sprint's name in association with the 700P for the past six months until the weeks prior to release when Verizon's info leaked.

I'd attribute the lack of MobiTV or any Verizon customizations (even the LED isn't the same as the Sprint version's) other than WirlessSync to the 700P as a result of it being a rather late addition to the Verizon roadmap. So the 700P's success is likely surprising and annoying Verizon more than anything, if ANY of the "700W has tailed off" rumors are to be believed.

Can you imagine what may happen if Verizon ends up playing with the two Treos' pricing levels and discounting one model more than the other?

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

RE: My notes from the conference call...
cervezas @ 6/30/2006 3:05:47 PM # Q
ChiA wrote:
Beersy said "What network operator lets you use a subsidized phone for a few months and then just return it in exchange it for a new one?"

Umm yes, good question. On reflection it's probably so that the carrier keeps the customer happy and making calls ie a nice regular income.

Tell it to the operators. My point was that I don't know of any operators who actually let you do this. You get 30 days, max. After that you have to pay full retail price if you change your mind and want a different phone (until your contract term is up). At least that's been my experience with Sprint, Cingular, and T-Mobile. Unless Verizon is different, I don't see how they lose money from someone returning a two- to six-month old phone and buying a new one.

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

The award for quote of the month goes to...
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 6/30/2006 4:35:36 PM # Q
The Moto Q smacked his company upside the head, but wait til he sees the effect Nokia's E61 is going to have on his bottom...line.


Bwahahahah!

RE: My notes from the conference call...
AdamaDBrown @ 6/30/2006 4:39:11 PM # Q
Verizon is much more restrictive in terms of returns--you get the bare minimum 14 days mandated by law, no more. So I'd have to say that anecdotes about people dumping the 700w for the Q or the 700p are almost certainly just anecdotes, based on a microscopic subset of hard-core gadget freaks with a pronounced Palm OS preference.

RE: My notes from the conference call...
ChiA @ 6/30/2006 6:09:55 PM # Q
Beersy said
Tell it to the operators. My point was that I don't know of any operators who actually let you do this. You get 30 days, max. After that you have to pay full retail price if you change your mind and want a different phone (until your contract term is up).

Well you said it yourself, maybe that 30 days is enough for some people.
Maybe you've simply not spent enough to make it worth their while Beersy! ;-)

Orange UK have business contracts for multiple mobiles costing up to £750 (US $1366) a month; it'll be pretty daft to lose such contracts to Vodafone UK over one or two £500 phones. I suspect it's cheaper to swap the phones than pay the lawyers haggling over contracts in court!

Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the President.
- President Theodore Roosevelt

RE: My notes from the conference call...
EdH @ 7/2/2006 8:49:43 PM # Q
SeldomVisitor said:

I would suggest that:

(1) The TREO 700W literally sold to early-adopters.

(2) The TREO 700P came out and those early-adopters bought it INSTEAD.

(3) Based on weak anecdotal evidence of TreoCentral posts about same, the TREO 700W was returned en mass and replaced by the TREO 700P (or Q!).

Huh? So #2 the early adopters waited 6 months for the 700p? does that sound like an early adopter to you? Yeah, and weak anecdotal evidence from another PalmOS Fansite is definitely to be relied upon to make a claim that the 700w is being returned en masse. great logic flow there. Whatever enables you to have restfull sleep at night.

RE: Windows Mobile is dead, PalmOS is the future
Foo Fighter @ 7/2/2006 8:53:19 PM # Q
>> "Whatever enables you to have restful sleep at night."

Well, when your platform is dying with no hope of any future incarnation, what else is there to do but engage in idle fantasy, in hopes that it might become a self-fulfilling prophecy?

Don't worry, Dorothy. Everything is going to be just fine. Just click your heels together three times and say "there's no place like Palm...there's no place like Palm". It's all simply a bad dream. PalmOS isn't dead, just taking a much needed rest after years of venerable service. Ignore the classic tune from Blue Oyster Cult playing in the background. It's nothing, really.

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

RE: My notes from the conference call...
SeldomVisitor @ 7/3/2006 7:56:57 AM # Q
I think it is important to note that the True Believers are almost universally reactive rather than proactive with their posts.

RE: My notes from the conference call...
EdH @ 7/3/2006 9:25:54 PM # Q
SeldomVisitor wrote:
I think it is important to note that the True Believers are almost universally reactive rather than proactive with their posts.

That is hysterical! Ok, I'll pretend I am in 3rd grade too. "I am rubber, you are glue...."

Your turn.



RE: My notes from the conference call...
freakout @ 7/3/2006 11:49:14 PM # Q
Do you post here just to piss people off?

Tim
I apologise for any and all emoticons that appear in my posts. You may shoot them on sight.
Treo 270 ---> Treo 650
RE: My notes from the conference call...
EdH @ 7/6/2006 6:41:52 AM # Q
No, I post to talk about Palm, but some posts are so silly it is very difficult to pass them up, like early adopters that wait 6 months. In the world of computers, if you wait 6 months you are at least one generation behind. It is like saying "early risers" that sleep until 10am.

Reply to this comment

Congratulations Palm.

Timothy Rapson @ 6/29/2006 6:01:14 PM # Q
Palm's profit margin = 5.2%
RIM's = 19.%

Palm used to make great, profitable, innovative, class-leading products. Products that worked. When they did they made real profits too. I guess playing defense has gotten Palm a steady small profitable revenue stream for their executives.

RE: Congratulations Palm.
LiveFaith @ 6/29/2006 11:06:03 PM # Q
Ouchhhh.

Pat Horne
RE: My notes from the conference call...
idiopathic @ 6/30/2006 12:30:18 AM # Q
Can I ask where you got those numbers from? Looking at Google Finance:

http://www.google.com/finance?q=PALM

Net Profit Margin: 21.62%
Operating Margin: 6.67%
Return on Average Assets: 28.01%
Return on Average Equity: 43.70%

http://www.google.com/finance?q=RIMM

Net Profit Margin: 18.50%
Operating Margin: 20.32%
Return on Average Assets: 15.49%
Return on Average Equity: 19.19%

I'm not very good at reading balance sheets but RIMM does not look that much better than Palm to me from these numbers, and for everything except operating margin Palm is better, no?

Did I misunderstand?

RE: Congratulations Palm.
AdamaDBrown @ 6/30/2006 1:20:10 AM # Q
Operating margin is the one you want to look at: it's basically how much more money a company is making than they're spending. You would think that that would be the net profit margin, but they factor in different things.

In any event, RIM makes huge bundles of money off of their software division, which is part of what pushes their OM so high, software sales not being dependent on actually manufacturing anything.

RE: Congratulations Palm.
AdamaDBrown @ 6/30/2006 1:45:47 AM # Q
To clarify: an operating margin of 6% means that out of every $1 in sales, after costs, $0.06 of that is profit. I realized that the way I stated it earlier could be misinterpreted.

RE: Congratulations Palm.
fierywater @ 6/30/2006 12:22:31 PM # Q
If they're still profiting, they're still alive. I suppose the current management team deserves some minor props. They had to recover from one of the worst management teams a company could ever run with.

RE: Congratulations Palm.
goat_fajitas @ 6/30/2006 4:13:36 PM # Q
"the current management team deserves some minor props. They had to recover from one of the worst management teams a company could ever run with."

True dat !

RE: Congratulations Palm.
SeldomVisitor @ 6/30/2006 4:20:23 PM # Q
> If they're still profiting, they're still alive...

Read this:

-- http://www.fool.com/News/mft/2006/mft06063027.htm?source=eptyholnk303100&logvisit=y&npu=y

RE: Congratulations Palm.
Surur @ 6/30/2006 4:37:11 PM # Q
Interesting article, but I hope he doesn't mind that I say he is an idiot. From the article:

Certainly I could be reading too much into the financials. It's just that I prefer to buy only when I understand the impetus for unusual fluctuations. So far, Palm hasn't offered a thorough explanation, and I'll be fooled (small-f) if I can think of a reasonable one. To be fair, management mentioned briefly in the conference call that A/R rose because of new Treo shipments. The inventory situation, however, was left murky, with improvement expected to come in 2007.

This guy has no clear understanding of Palm or the PDA market. He clearly does not know how dependent Palm is on branding, and what a risk a Windows Mobile handheld device was. It has clearly not worked out (not helped by Palm's stupid 32 MB, no WIFI policy), and it forecasts more pain for the Palm in the future, as their future expansion plans are currently heavily dependent on WM (a market which Palm themselves clearly dont understand).

Surur

They said I only argued for the sake of arguing, but after an hour I convinced them they were wrong...

RE: Congratulations Palm.
SeldomVisitor @ 6/30/2006 5:27:44 PM # Q
PALM is a "prosumer" device company. Prosumers are looking at The Competition. PALM is not an enterprise company. Enterprise hasn't begun looking at PALM, relatively speaking.

PALM had better come up with something Real Soon Now or they're gonna be left in the dust.

And The Market thought so, too.

And apparently The Motley Fool - long term "investors" supposedly - are beginning to seee the light and oubting the utility of PALm as a long term investment.

RE: Congratulations Palm.
Mauibro @ 6/30/2006 9:56:30 PM # Q
This guy has no clear understanding of Palm or the PDA market. He clearly does not know how dependent Palm is on branding, and what a risk a Windows Mobile handheld device was. It has clearly not worked out (not helped by Palm's stupid 32 MB, no WIFI policy), and it forecasts more pain for the Palm in the future, as their future expansion plans are currently heavily dependent on WM (a market which Palm themselves clearly dont understand).

I have stated in the past in the 1src forums and still believe that Palm has no long term interest in winmob.
Win Mobile treos are a quick buck to squeeze money out of a temporary Treo lead, and a bridge to exploit markets that Garnet cannot penetrate.

I stated back when "rumors" of the "W" started that when a similar Palm OS device was released reviewers would claim it suprerior. I was correct.
Message being that on basically the same hardware Palm OS is better.

If Palm can actually release devices in 07 running its own version of Linux all is well.
Think about it.
If generally speaking the "P" is better than the "W" now what happens when a new OS that fixes what is wrong with Garnet comes out?

Palm will have effectively grown its Treo brand name into areas on PPC dominance with the W line and then release devices that put it to shame using PalmOSLinux.
Comments about regret over not owning its own OS makes clear that they believe they can make better devices with their own hardware and software.
And that is their future people, it never was about WinMobile.


RE: Congratulations Palm.
freakout @ 6/30/2006 10:43:25 PM # Q
"If Palm can actually release devices in 07 running its own version of Linux all is well."

But that's the killer, isn't it? Palm have been so tight-lipped about their future OS plans that it's pretty much impossible to tell exactly *when* we'll be treated to a new PalmOS - for all we know, it may not be ready until 2008! I've read a lot of informed guesswork, but as of yet it seems that no one knows just how the new PalmOS is going. Or if it even exists.

You'd think they would at least drop a hint or two about their progress, if only to give hope to us Treo faithful and pacify the critics who've had the hearse waiting in the driveway for years now.

Heck, they haven't even ruled out ALP yet.

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

RE: Congratulations Palm.
fierywater @ 7/1/2006 1:48:47 AM # Q
I stated back when "rumors" of the "W" started that when a similar Palm OS device was released reviewers would claim it suprerior. I was correct.

By what, Mossberg and legions of Treo fansites? Of course they declared the 700p superior.

Most balanced sites (i.e. Brighthand/BargainPDA) wrote them off as equal, each with their own advantages and disadvantages.

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

Account

Register Register | Login Log in
user:
pass: