Back At The Waffle House

[Ed Hansberry]

Once again Palm/PalmOne/PalmSource has changed directions. The latest is <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/68/33027.html">PalmSource to build smart phone OS</a>. Currently, Palm is putting the finishing touches on Palm OS 6, code named "ThisOneSupportsMultitasking.ReallyWePromiseThisTime." They are going to take OS 5 though and instead of drop it, focus it to work better on smart phone devices.<br /><br />That is a good thing in my opinion. Microsoft figured this out in 1999 when they started the Smartphone project in earnest, then called Stinger. They started with the Pocket PC OS, as yet unreleased at that time, and started taking things out to make the phone experience better. It quickly became evident that the best way was to just take a very small section of the Windows CE 3.0 core and build a dedicated platform for the phones. History was repeating itself. They did the same thing when they tried to put a stripped down NT4 kernel in handheld devices and eventually decided it was best to start at ground zero and work up. Thus Windows CE was born. Ok, enough history.<br /><br />Palm, though, is sending mixed messages. Larry Slotnick is the Chief Product Officer at PalmSource. In <a href="http://news.com.com/2100-1045-5081032.html">this CNet article</a>, he says "Every Symbian device is a customization project, so very few applications run on all Symbian products," Slotnick said. "The same is true for Windows Mobile--an application for a Windows smart phone doesn't necessarily work on Pocket PC." He then claims "He said this standardization is a major advantage of Palm OS, compared with Windows Mobile or Symbian, the operating system that powers smart phones from Nokia, Sony Ericsson and others."<br /><br />Come on. You can't have it both ways. You tout standardization at a trade show yet in the back room, developers are working furiously to transform OS 5 into a rich smartphone platform and bring OS 6 up to the level of computing the competitors have had since 2000. Yes, standardization is good but when you try to cram a full PDA interface onto a voice centric device, you have people with tiny styluses tapping tiny screens. With an OS designed for a touchless screen, you get something that people can use and understand. There is no way they will build a great voice centric OS that runs all of the PDA applications. Of course, I doubt they really plan to. This is just more marketing speak from Palm that boils down to their unofficial slogan: "You don't need it until we have it." :roll: They spend more time slamming the features of the competition in the newsroom and copying them in the development lab than any other company I know. If they would pick a direction and focus on it, listening to their customers instead of telling them what they do and don't need, they never would have fallen from their over 80% market dominance in the late 90's to <a href="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=16757">the mid/upper-30% range today.</a>

[Fitch]

Here, here, Ed. In the words of Rob Corddry, "I mean... COME ON!!!" (rtsp://st21g1.services.att-idns.net/v1/494/1742/2597/dailyshow/corddry/corddry_7142_300.rm)

[guinness]

However, since POS is simpler in design, I would figure it's easier to fit it onto a phone cpmpared to MS. There's less overhead/complexity for it, MS tries too hard sometimes to be everyting to everyone.

To be honest, I'm not sure if I'd ever want a phone that has an OS from MS, my PC, fine, but a phone is something that has to be instant.

[dh]

However, since POS is simpler in design, I would figure it's easier to fit it onto a phone cpmpared to MS. There's less overhead/complexity for it, MS tries too hard sometimes to be everyting to everyone.

To be honest, I'm not sure if I'd ever want a phone that has an OS from MS, my PC, fine, but a phone is something that has to be instant.

I believe you are right. Even the POS 4.2 Smartphones like the Kyocera and the Samsung are much better than the MS Smartphone. The PPCPE does not seem to be the way to go either. When the Treo 600 arrives it is going to be the best integrated solution available by far, even though it has some major weaknesses. As much as I enjoy the PPC platform, I don't see the point in MS Smartphone.

I'm still inclined to be believe that for many people a full featured PPC plus a tiny BT cellphone is going to prove to be the best solution. I would like to see an update of the T68i, this would be perfect for me other than the super slow GPRS system.

To get back to Ed's topic, PalmSource seem to be trying to make POS be as close to MS as possible. This might well be a mistake, since their big selling point has always been simplicity and I'm sure that most PDA users don't care about all the goodies PPC offers. They just want an electronic database which Palm was always good at.

[Gremmie]

Remember when PPC was criticized for trying to be too much?

[Foo Fighter]

Here, here, Ed. In the words of Rob Corddry, "I mean... COME ON!!!" (rtsp://st21g1.services.att-idns.net/v1/494/1742/2597/dailyshow/corddry/corddry_7142_300.rm)

In the words of Comedian Lewis Black..."If we eat the cows that ate the stuff we didn't eat...we're still eating it!"

[BarryB]

There are degrees of customization. To criticize simply because an OS must undergo some customization to work in a new environment is silly.

So far as smartphones go, it's not even the degree of customization that is important, but how much that customization affects the degree of backwards compatability and how much it affects the UI/user experience.

If Palm wants to throw years and millions of dollars at efforts to produce a smartphone, more power to them. I think that competition between OSes, within reason, is a good thing. In the end, the consumer will decide which platform is preferable.

[SandersP]

I didn't knwo Palm has smartphone. I thought Treo is no more than Visor with radio transmitter attached to it. Even the 600 isn't much more than its predecessor, so much for customization.

[zipmail]

There's half-truth to the statistics here. Palm's share of the handheld OS market has dropped from the 80's to perhaps in the 50's and not 30's or near 40's as stated.

And looking at the pie chart - it goes to show that PPC platform is more expensive than Palm's.

Don't forget, besides Palm (or palmOne) and Sony, there are other licensees that should be added to get a more accurate look at it. What Ed's statement suggest is that Palm's own hardware market share has dropped and that is true. But most of the slack have been taken up by other licensees; especially Sony.

Back in 1995, PPC was but another egg yet to be hatched in M$ labs. And then came along Symbian and RIM and Linux, etc. When new players come in, there will be some reshuffling of market share. I am not sure if it is better to have more choices, but it sure is good that they don't sit on the laurels but keep improving the OS.

[mangochutneyman]

Come on. You can't have it both ways. You tout standardization at a trade show yet in the back room, developers are working furiously to transform OS 5 into a rich smartphone platform and bring OS 6 up to the level of computing the competitors have had since 2000.

Palm OS 5 phone Edition will primarily include all the Treo600 optimazitons included in Handspring's "OS 5.2.1H." These are primarily API's dealing with seamless dialpad nav, thumbboard integration, voice recorder and etc. (This is primarily the reason why the Treo600 probably won't be upgradeable to this new phone editon) Thus, you're partly correct in the sense that PalmSource will not be totally rebuilding the OS for mobiles. Secondly the 'standardization' of the OS refers to the fact that most PalmOS applications that work on PalmOS handhelds will work PalmOS smartphones. This is not the case for example between Series 60 and UIQ and WM03 and MS Smartphone 2002/03. Furthermore PalmOS smartphones are not software locked like many other platforms by wireless providers. Finally as Nagel stated, the Phone edtion will principally be focused at the low end smartphone segment towards the "$200 USD" price point b/c of it small footprint etc. This does not mean there will not eventually be higher end Palm OS 6 smartphones as well...

[lonesniper]

When I read the title "Back at The Waffle House" I initially thought the article would be about the resturant chain "The Waffle House".
Their waffles are so light and fluffy :D

[sfjlittel]

They spend more time slamming the features of the competition in the newsroom and copying them in the development lab than any other company I know.


I think it's funny you mentioned that for I know a company that has done the same thing for years...

[Foo Fighter]

Palm (or should I say the company fomerly known as Palm) has a long track record for talking out both sides of its mouth. They preach simplicity and yet secretly work behind closed doors to develop the very features it claims the public does not want or need. Remember the great "color" debate? "Color screens are unnecessary....Color breaks the user experience...color screens require too much power". Twelve months later the Palm IIIc is developed. Now here we are again with the issue of multitasking. "Users only need to open one application at a time....background processes consume battery power and confuse the user". Same old story. :treadmill:

Depite PalmSource's rhetoric, I'm excited by OS6. I have a feeling this release will prove to be very well designed and sleek. Everything OS5 wasn't. The big question that remains is..what hardware willl be backward compatible? I'm placing my bet that MANY legacy devices will be left out in the cold.

[saabcaptain]

As a iPaq 1940 user but a former LONG time user of Palms I just want to weigh in on Ed's commentary.

Several points are flat out wrong. PalmOne hardware share has not dropped to 30%. It is closer to 50%. Further if you add in PalmSource licensed handhelds, such as those from Sony the share compared to PPC devices still remains staggering. We on the PPC live in a glass house and yes things are getting much better because PalmSource is getting stale and their hardware is getting more expensive, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't throw stones.

Also in regards to viablity in terms of a smartphone platform, don't count PalmSource out if you compare it to the MS Smartphone platform. Both aren't ideal, with both having formely been larger OS platforms shrunk to be "easy" to use on your phone but although making great strides never quite making it totally "easy." So far I still find the best cellphones are those designed ground up as a cellphone. How can we PPC users critize PalmSource's plans for the cellphone market when in many ways it is exactly what MS does?

Both Microsoft and PalmSource have some major problems with the direction of their respective handhelds and cellphones if EITHER wants to see the market for PDAs or "smartphones" start to ever expand again.

[SandersP]

Several points are flat out wrong. PalmOne hardware share has not dropped to 30%. It is closer to 50%.


It has. It's Palm inc. world wide marketshare indicates by gartner. 51% is the whole Palm OS devices market share. (Palm inc. + Sony + whoever else)

see gartner Q2 '03 report.


Also in regards to viablity in terms of a smartphone platform, don't count PalmSource out if you compare it to the MS Smartphone platform. Both aren't ideal, with both having formely been larger OS platforms shrunk to be "easy" to use on your phone but although making great strides never quite making it totally "easy." So far I still find the best cellphones are those designed ground up as a cellphone. How can we PPC users critize PalmSource's plans for the cellphone market when in many ways it is exactly what MS does?

The smartphone games is very early. It's not well defined yet. One Palm1 big weakness is hardware expertise. Wireless phone is tied to infrastructure, unlike PDA smartphone development has to take risk chosing a not yet mature. (eg what type of wireless band to use. a year from now)

Smartphone also is worst than PDA. Each model is high investment with short windows of opportunity. An extensively develped product may become a flop overnight for no apparent reason, simply because consumer doesn't like the case color.

Lastly, a lot of basic hardware component of a smartphone is a big boy game, screen, transmitter, latest integrated CPU, etc. A phone company without a strong partner will lag behind. OS is not the whole story, hardware part is still crucial.

[JonnoB]

The line "ThisOneSupportsMultitasking.Really WePromiseThisTime." messes with the mobile formating of this site :?

[zipmail]

Remember the great "color" debate? "Color screens are unnecessary....Color breaks the user experience...color screens require too much power". Twelve months later the Palm IIIc is developed.

IMHO, I would take that statement in context to that time when color technology was not ready for PDA. In fact, 12-months later it was still not ready. The Palm IIIc color screen was awful and if I am not wrong, it didn't sell well either.

Yes, multi-tasking would have been great too, but given the processor speed that Palm was using (when it was still double-digit), I rather not have multi-tasking if it was going to be slow switching.

Sure, Palm could have worked on this earlier but remember, they had a bozo for a CEO - Carl 'Yankovich' Yankee-ski. Thank goodness they didn't wait as long as Apple did to get rid of him - otherwise Palm's market share will be in the single digit.

[Timothy Rapson]

Sure, Palm could have worked on this earlier but remember, they had a bozo for a CEO - Carl 'Yankovich' Yankee-ski. Thank goodness they didn't wait as long as Apple did to get rid of him - otherwise Palm's market share will be in the single digit.

Oh no, he mentioned Carl in front of Foo. Like waving a red flag in front of a bull. (Talk about Bull! Carl had a truckload.) Are we all going to have to get back in the tea box and sign "On England's Shores"?

[Timothy Rapson]

Well, this statement about nails it for Palm for the past 5 years.

"They spend more time slamming the features of the competition in the newsroom and copying them in the development lab than any other company I know,"



You know, I think Palm is doing good work this past year. OS 5 works, the Zires are stunningly successful and deserve to be. The Tungsten TE and T3 finaly deliver on the promises of OS 5 and trump PPCs is several ways.

But, as long as Palm has the same basically dishonest approach to their customers and their products I don't see how they can keep from failing eventually. An attitude that the customer is there to be fooled, used, profited from and ignored will always fail eventually.

Sony pinned me and millions of other users to the wall with their promise of high capacity memory sticks. What is Palm lying to us about? They already dropped the UIC on the newest Tungsten. WHy? To save 50 cent per unit? Who cares if the user can't use UIC, they are only there to be taken advantage of and pay the CEOs high salaries in the good times.

IT is unfortunate. I find Microsoft even more egregeous as they not only fleece their users, but their competitors. That's another thread.

Alas poor EPOC, we knew and loved him Horatio. Perhaps a P800 will do it for us honest PDA users some day.

[PalmInfocenter]

lol. ok, take your hand and wave it over your head, and at the same time make a woshing sound!

[Scott R]

Sony pinned me and millions of other users to the wall with their promise of high capacity memory sticks. What is Palm lying to us about? They already dropped the UIC on the newest Tungsten. WHy? To save 50 cent per unit? Who cares if the user can't use UIC, they are only there to be taken advantage of and pay the CEOs high salaries in the good times.I won't respond right now to the usual silly claims made in EdH's post, but I did want to address this. Timothy, I suspect that palmOne dropped the UC on the Zire and Tungsten E for the same reason that HP doesn't use their standard connector on the 1900-series. It isn't to save cost, but rather to treat these as advantages to buying one of their other models. If they make the low-cost models too good, they kill sales of their higher priced (i.e. - higher profit) models. As a consumer, it's fine not to like it, but I really can't disagree with it from a business perspective.

Besides, palmOne recently announced an IR foldable keyboard that is priced less than the UC model, so there's really not much that you need the UC for these days, anyway.

The decision by PalmSource to create this new version of OS5 is, I suspect, similarly designed. They're going to cut out features and sell this phone-friendly OS5 license for less, thus enabling their licensees to sell even lower-cost Palm OS-based phones. Frankly, I don't see it as a good idea, though. For one thing, how much are they charging for the OS5 licenses now? I wouldn't think the difference in cost would amount to more than $10 or $20, would it? Addititionally, if any device needs true multitasking, it's a wireless device. The Palm OS manufacturers had already figured out how to get MP3 playing in the background without true multitasking. But you need multitasking to be able to have Instant messaging, background email checking, etc. all going while you're doing something else.

Scott

[SandersP]

The Tungsten TE and T3 finaly deliver on the promises of OS 5 and trump PPCs is several ways.


How is TE and T3 deliver? they are not even officially out yet.
moreover, TE is NOT the first $199 machine, and it will not be the most advance $199 machine.

T3? It may have big screen, but so is e800 albeit still nebulous. But the biggest question remains. Where is the wireless?

[SandersP]

I won't respond right now to the usual silly claims made in EdH's post, but I did want to address this. Timothy, I suspect that palmOne dropped the UC on the Zire and Tungsten E for the same reason that HP doesn't use their standard connector on the 1900-series. It isn't to save cost,

So, tell me again what UC stands for ? :roll:

[Hooked]

Universal Connector. The standard expansion mechanism for Palm devices before SD support. I wish all pda manufacturer's would use USB as their connector. It would sure simplify things for the consumer.

[Timothy Rapson]

Sony pinned me and millions of other If they make the low-cost models too good, they kill sales of their higher priced (i.e. - higher profit) models. As a consumer, it's fine not to like it, but I really can't disagree with it from a business perspective.

Scott

Exactly my gripe. Throw your loyal customers out the train window.......for money. That shows selfish short-sightedness.

[ucfgrad93]

The Tungsten TE and T3 finaly deliver on the promises of OS 5 and trump PPCs is several ways.


How is TE and T3 deliver? they are not even officially out yet.
moreover, TE is NOT the first $199 machine, and it will not be the most advance $199 machine.

T3? It may have big screen, but so is e800 albeit still nebulous. But the biggest question remains. Where is the wireless?

The T|3 and T|E are not nebulous. Go to www.brighthand.com or www.palminfocenter.com and look at the forums and you will see a bunch of threads with pictures of each device. Lots of people already have the T|3 and so far, most of the reactions have been positive. The T|3 does have integrated Bluetooth.

The T|E is not the first $199 device, true, but it is the first OS5 machine to be introduced under $200.

[Timothy Rapson]

Universal Connector. The standard expansion mechanism for Palm devices before SD support. I wish all pda manufacturer's would use USB as their connector. It would sure simplify things for the consumer.

Amen to that and the ONLY thing keeping them from doing so, is greed. They can make more money causing the customer all kinds of grief. So, again, throw the customer overboard to get few more bucks. How long have desktops had standard connectors? Forever? This PDA business is so lame in this respect. My bet is that it cost them far MORE to make different connectors for everyhting when a standard USB port would help the user.

[Scott R]

Timothy, with all due respect, I really think you're getting way too worked up about this. palmOne is a business, not a charity. They need to make money. They need to give people a reason to buy their more expensive devices while at the same time offering something that competes well with what the competition is offering at the lower price points.

I'm all for bashing a company over false advertising (as was the case with the Palm m130's color screen fiasco), but palmOne is not advertising this device as having the UC. There's no reason why HP couldn't add their standard connector to the 1900-series. It wouldn't cost them much more. But, from a business standpoint, I can't really blame them for not doing it, either.

Let me ask you this...Would you be happy if the Tungsten E had the UC but was priced at $250? If so, do you think it would have been smarter for palmOne to do that instead of offering the "hobbled" Tungsten E at $200?

Scott

[whydidnt]

Many of these posts got me thinking about last weeks thread regarding the future of PDA's and whether they will ever capture a bigger market share. It seems to me all the complaints about different connectors, memory standardes etc, are one of the primary "Things" that make these devices complicated and prevent the mass acceptance the manufacturers all want.

Think back to the semi-early PC days, what if you had to buy a different Keyboard or Monitor for each PC you purchased? One of the things that you could count on was similar connections accross different models/manufacturers. Those manufacturers that tried proprietary connectors/interfaces quickly found they had no market for their PCs. Anyone else remember IBM and "MicroChannel"?

Now on to Ed's comments...

I agree that Palm has for a long time dictacted to it's customers what they "wanted" and often had to eat crow as a result. However I think that MS in the MS-PPC world is even more guilty of this. MS' hardware requirements are overly restrictive and limit innovation. Why can't I buy an MS Smartphone that allows me to enter infomation with a styus? Because MS tells me I wouldn't want to do that on a phone.

Why can't a I buy a clamshell PPC with higher resolution screen? Because MS tells me I don't need those features.

The issue I have isn't with the greed (Capitalism is GOOD) that causes manufacturers to eliminate cheap parts to differentiate more expensive models. It's the fact that in doing so they further prevent wide scale acceptance of the devices they are trying to mass market.

Whydidnt

[Ed Hansberry]

I won't respond right now to the usual silly claims made in EdH's post, but I did want to address this. :roll: Timothy, I suspect that palmOne dropped the UC on the Zire and Tungsten E for the same reason that HP doesn't use their standard connector on the 1900-series. It isn't to save cost, but rather to treat these as advantages to buying one of their other models.
No. It is because the 1900 doesn't support serial, so no keyboard will work, be it a Stowaway or thumb board. So, instead of getting customer calls, they flipped it around so it was obvious it wouldn't work. To their credit, the dimensions are the same though so external chargers still work fine across the 3800/3900/5100/5400/5500/2200/1900 lines. Thanks for playing though Scott.

[Timothy Rapson]

Timothy, with all due respect, I really think you're getting way too worked up about this. palmOne is a business, not a charity. Let me ask you this...Would you be happy if the Tungsten E had the UC but was priced at $250? If so, do you think it would have been smarter for palmOne to do that instead of offering the "hobbled" Tungsten E at $200?

Scott


I just think Palm must be competive in hardware. Competitive with HP 1900 (now $187.50 with 64 MB, 200 MZ, & microphone), Dell Axim X5, (300 MZ, dual slots), and Toshiba (poor support....OK, maybe Palm is competitive with Toshiba :mrgreen: ) They sell the number one and number two best selling PDAs out there and should have no trouble making far more off each one that Toshiba does on its average sale. So, why are they so cheap with memory? Why no VG models? Why not give the users the models they expected when they expect them, rather than waiting until a year after OS 5 ships before offering consumer priced models like the TE and Zire 21? PPC has cut a huge swath through Palms market share while PalmOne was sleeping. Palm had better start being competive (not necessarily charity towards their customers, just responsible) or they will have an awful hard time holding onto their base of users for OS 6.

[Hooked]

Scott,
Adding or removing features in order to differentiate products by cost is one thing. It's a straightforward trade-off of different values. But, I guarantee you the difference in cost between Tungsten models has nothing to do with the cost of including the Universal Connector. Likewise, arbitrarily making something proprietary as opposed to a standard or disabling an already included feature when it doesn't add any value is another thing.

Sony hobbling its CF slot to boost Memory Stick sales is an example. ( BTW having n-different types of flash memory formats in general is a pointless pain.) Intel deliberately burning out the math co-processor in the 486DX chips to make "cheaper" 486SX chips is another perfect case. Pda's having different connectors and different batteries which all do the same thing. These are all differences which add no value either by adding features or reducing costs. It would be like homebuilders using proprietary electrical outlets that only work with appliances they supply or cars having fuel tanks which only accept nozzles from certain company's gas pumps.

I don't mind greed, as long as it's not accompanied by outright stupidity.

Take Microsoft, it would be better to mandate a single standard connector than a single standard screen resolution. I'd be willing to pay a premium for a 480x320 or better a 640x480 PPC screen, but a different connector or power plug shape buys me nothing. It's noise, not signal.

This short-sighted, "increase profits by removing an olive from the jar" mentality is the type of behavior that RIGHTLY pisses people off. They may as well be giving their customers the finger. Long-term it goes against common sense from both a business and technological standpoint.

They should differentiate their products by INNOVATING AND ADDING REAL VALUE, or don't bother.