How Microsoft and Palm Got Together & 5 Reasons Why Palm Fell From Grace

[Jonathon Watkins]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/27/technology/27soft.html' target='_blank'>http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/27/t...ogy/27soft.html</a><br /><br /></div><i>"Microsoft's truce with Palm, its longtime rival in palmtop software, was forged with a rare agreement to allow Palm to tinker with the Windows Mobile software. . . . But Mr. Gates said a partnership made no sense until Microsoft was well along in developing Windows Mobile 5.0, which it released in May. "Palm always did great work," he said. "We lusted after some of the things they did well and wanted to combine them with some of the things that we did well." Initially, Microsoft resisted the idea of allowing Palm to differentiate the way Windows Mobile worked on the Treo, but eventually relented. . . . "This is unique," Mr. Gates said. "Most people take Windows as it is." Both companies contributed development and expertise to the project. . ."</i><br /><br />The New York Times has an interesting article about how Palm have been allowed to tweak the Windows Mobile OS for their Treo. I don't believe that the current WM OEMs have any choice over taking 'Windows as it is', so perhaps this will open the door to more differentiation between vendors. One of the joys of WM software is that it should work on all devices, but with square aspect screens and these new systems extensions, perhaps that won't be the case in the future? But, isn't over-tweaking their OS one of the things that got Palm into trouble in the first place? This <a href="http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1040_22-5884040.html">ZDNet article </a>lists the reasons why they think Palm lost it. Basically Palm were ahead, but fumbled the ball and no-one plays catch-up like Microsoft. Anyway, it still feels odd to be posting Palm stories under 'News' rather than 'The competition". ;-)

[Felix Torres]

Technically, WinCE has *always* been extensible/tweakable, etc, as is desktop-Windows. Its just that few vendors choose to.
(Remember the Casio B-series?)

PocketPC, as a very specific trademark, has had enforced consistency as a branding exercise that pretty much locked down the basic UI but it still allowed extensions through officially sanctioned and supported mechanisms. This still exists.

Which is to say, Palm has *not* hacked the OS.
They have been, instead, provided with OS entry points and "hooks" they needed to implement their proprietary extensions. The hooks are part of the OS and presumably exist in all WM 5.0 systems, while the apps/dlls that use those hooks are Palm specific. So there should be a clear line of separation between what is WM5-universal and what is Palm-hardware specific.

Not having seen a Treo 700, I'm not sure if Palm modified any MS-supplied *apps* and associated support dlls or replaced/supplemented them with Palm-specific apps/dlls. But either way, it should have no effect on the published system APIs, so the odds of third-party apps breaking are relatively low; its all (mostly) a matter of application coders staying within the system development guidelines.

So I don't think we need fear that Palm will infect the WM5 platform with a wide-spread case of firmware forking on a product-by-product basis like their POS product line currently suffers. 8)

[Jonathon Watkins]

Which is to say, Palm has *not* hacked the OS.
They have been, instead, provided with OS entry points and "hooks" they needed to implement their proprietary extensions. The hooks are part of the OS and presumably exist in all WM 5.0 systems, while the apps/dlls that use those hooks are Palm specific. So there should be a clear line of separation between what is WM5-universal and what is Palm-hardware specific.

The way it was first reported suggested that it was a bit more of a system hack, but the fuller expeneation does indeed seem to suggest that is a bit more superficial than that as the following quote shows:

Palm added interface elements like the ability to speed dial by pressing a person's photo on the screen, the ability to decline to take a call by automatically sending a message (rather than ignoring it) and the ability to go through your cellphone voice mail with on-screen icons.

So, nothing too dramatic so far, but this is only Palm's first Wm device......

So I don't think we need fear that Palm will infect the WM5 platform with a wide-spread case of firmware forking on a product-by-product basis like their POS product line currently suffers.

Exectly! Now there's a scary thought. :worried: I'm glad that MS will be keeping a firm hand on Palm's OS bodging tendencies. :takethat:

[155]

Alternate theory:

Windows Mobile costs a lot less than the Palm OS. Doesn't a license of Windows Mobile go for about $10? I wonder how much the palm os on the Treo costs.

[Felix Torres]

Alternate theory:

Windows Mobile costs a lot less than the Palm OS. Doesn't a license of Windows Mobile go for about $10? I wonder how much the palm os on the Treo costs.

No go.
The last number I saw quoted was $6 per unit for PALM OS.
Remember that thing goes into blister-pack organizers, not just cell-phones.
Plus, compared to WM5, there is no there there... ;-)
(Translation: a lot of the advanced features are done by the hardware guys, not the software guys...)

[Felix Torres]

The way it was first reported suggested that it was a bit more of a system hack, but the fuller expeneation does indeed seem to suggest that is a bit more superficial than that as the following quote shows:

Palm added interface elements like the ability to speed dial by pressing a person's photo on the screen, the ability to decline to take a call by automatically sending a message (rather than ignoring it) and the ability to go through your cellphone voice mail with on-screen icons.

So, nothing too dramatic so far, but this is only Palm's first Wm device......


Lets be realistic:
For PR and face-saving purposes, if nothing else, Palm needs to be able to claim they bring something unique to the table. And they do bring something besides the brand. It should be enough to get them established as good little members of the WM5 OEM community.

That said, MS did not give up the farm or anything to bring Palm on board. Most of the accomodation and customization they provided would be available to most any other BIG OEM partner and has been available in the past. Just think back to the original Casio Color PsPC or the Compaq iPaq 36xx series; both brought new hardware features that MS gladly provided for.

And, as the article points out, MS provided special support *this* time because they were new and because the timing, as to WM5 development, was right; they could do it at not impact to the delivery schedule. Future accomodations will be subject to the same restrictions.

Or to put it another way:

MS currently offers Palm a very special relationship. They also offer their other OEM partners that same very special relationship. And, as Syndrome says: "When everybody is special..." ;-)

[Jason Lee]

palm didn't do anything that any other developer can't do. You remember all the press releases about how easy it is for people to code for wm5 because of all the hardware APIs. Anyone can write a today plugin to dial the phone. Or even a today plugin to display video from the camera.. all the APIs are there.
Palm is just the first device maker to actually do this. The most hp has ever done is buy some third party app, rename it and pack it into the rom. :) This is basically the same thing but palm wrote the software themselves. Plus i think they added a lot more than just a task swithcer. ;)

Even the new hps have their own today meter plugin. WM5 just allows for more/easier direct hardware access though standard APIs.