I'm not sure why Apple would fear more players in the field. That tends to result in more popularity for the form-factor, less expensive manufacture processes, and in the end, more sales to their core market.
[citation][nom]bustapr[/nom]Well, to summarize this entire article:Now that Palm will have buckets of money, theyll be a big player in the smartphone space again.Thats what basically all 8 reasons said.[/citation]
Money is an integral piece to the puzzle, but throwing money at someone/something doesn't guarantee a great product. HP's history with acquisitions combined with their widespread influence in the tech world is just as important.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the folks that work at palm now won't be developing squat after they finish what they're working on now. They'll be riding the "work force reduction" train to the unemployment office, while Hurd is busy courting and buying someone else. Meantime, their intellectual property will be busily dissected at one of the many engineering labs HP now owns in China after the 3com acquisition. That will give HP an operating system to load on everything from phones to business desktops with naught a single royalty paid to Microsoft.
And don't look for innovation, there won't be any. When HP wants to innovate these day, they write a check and buy another company.
I pity the Iphone enthusiasts. Someone bought me one and I find that as a phone the software for it is crap compared to my Nokia phone. Ever since I installed Itunes my contacts in it are up shite creek without a paddle and I have no control over it as I did with my Nokia which gave not only no problems BUT I HAD TOTAL CONTROL. As for the apps bit it's just an expensive bit of crap. Malti 35 Melbourne.
I'm not convinced Apple buyers can be swayed to purchase non-apple products? They seem to be similar to Harley Davidson type consumers. They buy brand first, specs second. I think if any market studies are done on Google's Android, they'd see it eating more of the non-iPhone marketshare for this very reason.
Apple has the closed box Job's approved play pen. Google Android has the open box free-for-all (and it actually works well as a phone... imagine that).
What would be Palm's angle? Try and steal marketshare from Google? Doubtful... They must have other plans for it. (I tend to believe its for the patent portfolio as well as some other commenters have stated).
This article had some well thought out analysis. It's better than what most tech pundits seem to be posting these days.
The only place where I think they got it very wrong was the mention that WebOS "is certainly not the worst smartphone operating system out there" combined with the statement that "Palm’s current hardware is actually quite good".
The truth is the complete opposite.
WebOS is the BEST mobile OS. From a user interface perspective, the way it handles multitasking and notifications to its contact/calendar synergy with the cloud, most folks out there in techland, Android and iPhone lovers alike, all agree Palm got it right in WebOS.
Likewise, there is hands-down agreement across all the blogs that the hardware build quality is terrible. The hardware specs themselves are good, but the Pres have awful issues with cracks creeping up from the USB door that go across the screen, the 'oreo' effect on the Pre model (taken care of on the Pre Plus model), and the keyboard repeating or missing key presses once it starts to get a few months old.
I think the author took the reverse position because of the way he interpreted OS vs. Hardware. If the OS is judged on its performance and not its usability, and the hardware is judged based on the specs, and not the build quality, then I understand the statements. However, I think usability and build quality play a more important role than the former criteria in terms of the impact on the overall user experience.