02-04-2004, 09:00 PM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228
|
|
PalmSource: "Yeah, Microsoft Has The Right Strategy!"
http://news.com.com/2100-1045-5152914.html
"SAN FRANCISCO--PalmSource plans to announce next week a revamped operating system strategy designed to get its OS included on a broader array of cell phones, including lower-priced models. Under the plan, the company will simultaneously develop multiple versions of its OS and aim them at different parts of the cell phone market. By maintaining development of multiple versions, PalmSource is hoping to cover more bases in the market for smart phones and other devices. Historically, Palm OS-based devices have been offered only in the most expensive class of cell phones, which cost several hundred dollars."
While Microsoft does have some Pocket PC Phone devices, which are a full blown version of Pocket PC with phone hardware, they have all along known that having a separate OS written from the ground up would be needed for cell phones, and they knew it for several reasons. Pocket PC is a great platform for mobile computing, but PDA software isn't necessarily the best for all forms of mobile computing. The UI should be single finger navigable with one hand. You should never need a stylus to do things on your phone. The Treo, despite all of the accolades from the press and loyalty from existing users, has not been a market success. It hasn't been a failure to be sure, but PalmSource now recognizes that to be successful on a phone, you must design for the phone, not take a PDA and "phoneize" it.
So now PalmSource heads down the path Microsoft blazed back in 1999 when they realized that the MS SmartPhone OS, then called Stinger, couldn't be a Pocket PC stripped down. It had to start fresh, building a UI that was familiar to Windows and Pocket PC users, but 100% dedicated to a voice centric device. PalmSource's phone OS will build off of the core from OS 6 (which will be renamed) much like Microsoft's software starts with Windows CE, but the end result will be quite different. Different enough, I suspect, that a new software market will have to be developed just as Microsoft has had to nurture for the SmartPhone platform, one that has no touch screen, one that will need a comparatively tiny screen, a smaller RAM footprint, a less beefy processor, etc. Welcome to 1999 PalmSource! :wink:
|
| |
|
|
|
02-04-2004, 09:39 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 16
|
|
Ina Fried obviously hasn't tried a Treo 600. It's VERY nice, works without a stylus, has great battery life and a sync that actually works.
Seems to me that it's "Welcome to 2001 Ina Fried!"
|
| |
|
|
|
02-04-2004, 10:20 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 48
|
|
It's not the same as Microsoft's strategy at all, because most Palm OS software will run on either version of the Palm OS. I don't think any Smartphone apps will run on Pocket PC or vice versa without recompiling.
|
| |
|
|
|
02-04-2004, 10:27 PM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228
|
|
Did either of you read the post? The Treo hasn't set the world on fire. Like Riedme's post: The Treo 600, now that's a Blackberry killer. You have to sell a lot of units, more than the competition to kill it. I don't think the Blackberry is even coughing at the site of the Treo 600, much less dying from its presence.
And do you really think that when Palm starts making these multiple OSs based on OS6 that all Palm software will work on all devices? Of course not. Try using Agendus without using a stylus. Or on a screen with ~100X200 pixels that is more likely to appear on a cell phone.
Also speculating, but I wonder if part of what is in this all new from the ground up rewrite (David Nagal's words, not mine) if they totally abandon OS4 code? I doubt they want a cellphone having to put up with the overhead of OS4 dragonball compatiblity.
|
| |
|
|
|
02-04-2004, 10:35 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 20
|
|
Ed, you just don't get it...
Microsoft Pocket PC and Microsoft Smartphone share some common elements, but the have a completely incompatible user experience paradigm. Its not just a matter of recompiling Pocket PC applications - Smartphone applications actually need to be entirely redesigned.
Our strategy couldn't be more different.
Though we are going forward with two versions of the OS (a low end and a high end, essentially) -- both versions maintain a constant user experience paradigm, and they are for the most part software compatible with each other.
And - BOTH versions of the OS are suitable for and will be used in phones.
This isn't a matter of splitting the Palm OS into phone and PDA versions like Microsoft did. This is a matter of offering our licensees even more flexibility and ability to differentiate by allowing the creation of both inexpensive lower-end devices, and richer high-end devices.
I think Handspring, Samsung, GSL, and Kyocera have all demonstrated just how good of a phone you can build using the current OS.
And it's only going to get better.
- chris
|
| |
|
|
|
02-04-2004, 10:40 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 56
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by reidme
It's not the same as Microsoft's strategy at all, because most Palm OS software will run on either version of the Palm OS. I don't think any Smartphone apps will run on Pocket PC or vice versa without recompiling.
|
Good point. Hansberry never misses an opportunity to spin every story as "Palm is Dead". :roll:
Regardless, I do think MS' strategy to develop a "PDA for the masses" via cell phones was a smart move. One handed operation IS vital. I've been saying for a while that this is something Palm had to do (develop a smart phone centric OS). The PDA market is rapidly disappearing and margins are shrinking. This is only going to continue to worsen.
However, I wouldn't assume this new Palm OS won't have a touch screen. As for one handed operation? Well, I think the Treo is a horrible device (no one wants to hold a PDA up to their head), but its one handed operation via the D-pad/OS-integration is almost revolutionary. If they can integrate this into a smaller form factor (think MPx200), they'll have a sure fire winner on their hands.
The only reason I use an MS Smartphone is that the MPx200 is the only smart phone (lowercase "s") on the market that doesn't make one look like a raving dork. If Palm Source can write (or modify) an OS that allows for a similar form factor, I think I and others would be all over it. And while were at it, the pricing needs to be "free" with a contract from carriers.
|
| |
|
|
|
02-04-2004, 10:49 PM
|
|
Oracle
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 830
|
|
heres one ms stratagy that palmsource can learn from. UPGRADABILITY!!!
|
| |
|
|
|
02-04-2004, 10:59 PM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228
|
|
Re: Ed, you just don't get it...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cdunphy
Though we are going forward with two versions of the OS (a low end and a high end, essentially) -- both versions maintain a constant user experience paradigm, and they are for the most part software compatible with each other.
|
Just wanted to get that quoted so I could refer back to it after this is released. I seem to recall the same statements about OS4/OS5 compatibility, yet there were a lot of apps that had to be redone.
So, will you have phones that are not using touchscreens? Can you explain how an app like Agendus will work sans stylus?
Quote:
|
This isn't a matter of splitting the Palm OS into phone and PDA versions like Microsoft did. This is a matter of offering our licensees even more flexibility and ability to differentiate by allowing the creation of both inexpensive lower-end devices, and richer high-end devices.
|
"This is a matter of offering our licensees even more flexibility and ability to differentiate..." Isn't that what David Nagel called " slightly chaotic?" 
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by pdaisdead
Good point. Hansberry never misses an opportunity to spin every story as "Palm is Dead". :roll:
|
Uhm... and here I thought I was congratulating PalmSource. Don't recall seeing anything in there about Palm/PalmSources continual declining marketshare since 2000, cash drain of $1B between Palm/PalmSource/Handspring over that time period or anything else. Just a kudos on their strategy moving forward.
|
| |
|
|
|
02-04-2004, 11:06 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 17
|
|
I must say that I do enjoy reading this site, but every now and then you guys post stuff like this. =/
I'm sorry but I don't drink the Microsoft kool-aid. I love my PocketPC (and all my Palms before it), but I'm a proud Mac user (just switched, never going back) and if it wasn't for Palm, MS wouldn't even be in the handheld market. That doesn't mean they haven't made some good choices after copying Palm, but come on, lay off the MS hype. Both companies have gotten some things right, and some things wrong. It is only wise to acknowledge both, IMHO.
Where's the headline "MS Copied Palm Way back in the 90's Because PALM Made a Cool Device and Then MS Proceeded To Take Over Because They Are A Resource Laden Behemoth Who Crushes Any Competition With Monopolistic Practices"? [Insert shot of Bill with Palm device in hand here] After all, with all MS's money and power it is shocking Palm still even exists. As a consumer I would think you would want to be supporting all major PDA developers. Tell me this: Do you want a world where there is one choice? Because that is what MS wants. I sure don't.
:roll:
|
| |
|
|
|
02-04-2004, 11:15 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 16
|
|
Oh, I read the article. The only mistake I made was refering to Ina as being in 2001 when they were your words.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
