I've never quite understood what HP thought it could gain from acquiring PalmOS.. in terms of adoption, its quite a ways behind Android for phones, and at this point it doesnt exist on tablets. So if their aim is to enter back into the phone market with something beyond failed Windows Mobile devices, this will probably end for them in failure. If it is to enter in to the market with a tablet, thats a different story, but I'd say Android has a better shot there as well. Seems like a big fat waste of time and money to me from HP.
that true... but if they did improve the PalmOS, it would be a hit in the market... wouldn't it... there is nothing wrong with more competition... if others are in fear, they will have to innovate to stay in the market.
I think the theory behind their purchase is to differentiate their products from the competition. With android 3, hardware makers will not be as predominant as their current status. Google's gui will pretty much level the playing field and no reason will exist for HTC's Sense gui or Motorola's blur. Hardware makers will compete solely on hardware specs. Having said that, by having PalmOS, HP has the advantage of utilizing a feature rich OS without competing with the other android makers. HP can thus attempt to compete on the whole user experience. HP can thus control hardware as well as software. However, I seriously doubt HP can compete on this angle. HP is not known for its innovation. HP is no Apple! But who knows, maybe they can pull out a Wii
[citation][nom]matt87_50[/nom]the new webOS looks like a better dev platform than Android. most notably, because they are pushing c++ - which everyone else uses - not java. so porting should be easy.[/citation]
Everyone as in... who? While most platforms have the ability to run native C++ code, their primary interface language is usually not C++. iPhone uses Objective-C, Android uses Java, Blackberry uses Java, Windows Mobile 5-6 use .Net, and Windows Phone 7 is going to use C#/Silverlight.
Beyond that, how do you gauge a dev platform based solely on the language they use? How about SDK usability and simplicity? Emulator quality? Publishing platform quality? OS capabilities?
[citation][nom]Abrahm[/nom]Everyone as in... who? While most platforms have the ability to run native C++ code, their primary interface language is usually not C++. iPhone uses Objective-C, Android uses Java, Blackberry uses Java, Windows Mobile 5-6 use .Net, and Windows Phone 7 is going to use C#/Silverlight. Beyond that, how do you gauge a dev platform based solely on the language they use? How about SDK usability and simplicity? Emulator quality? Publishing platform quality? OS capabilities?[/citation]
well in that case, I can tell you the iphone and winMo7 tools are terrible buggy pieces of crap. I don't know about android, I can only hope they are better. but I find it hard to believe that they could make something worse.
as for SDKs? it doesn't matter how terrible they are because you can just make a wrapper to bend the interface to be the way you want, and then never have to worry about it again, with different languages, everything you code has to be done again, and again in the different language.
you can happily use c++ on the iphone, in fact, for games it is easier - openGL and openAL are C interfaces, not objective c.
taking A whole game to a new platform with a different language takes months.
taking it to a platform that uses the same language, and openGL, takes literally a couple of days. (such as it would be for a c++ iphone games, to webOS, or nokia's new one)
I know which I'd prefer. especially with the hardware architecture being pretty much identical across the board, it is so unbelievably stupid for all these companies to artificially make it so hard to port.
Holy Crap!!! A 2 GHz smartphone from Motorola Q4 this year??? That's crazy!!! Didn't we just hit the 1 GHz mark with the smartphones? Definitely bragging rights for sure. I hope HP gives the WebOS 2.0 phones some competitive hardware. Seems like smartphones started getting some serious hardware recently.
There's nothing wrong with WebOS.what happened was at PRE-acquisition (in case the lot of you here are clueless about):-
~ Piss poor hardware.Both Pre and Pixi Pluses didn't exactly fly off the shelves for some damn "good" reasons.Already over argued about.R&D aside this aspect are still somewhat forgivable (hey personally I think RIM's Blackberrys aren't that much at par except that RIM didn't repeat BELOW>>>)
Hmmm - I bought my Palm Pre day one on Sprint and still love it. My only HW issue was the battery which Sprint swapped for me. I love the form factor and after more than a year of daily use it still is in perfect shape. I just want an updated version on Sprint.
I also carry a work phone which is a HTC TouchPro 2 that I absolutely hate - too big, crashes and current WinMo is horrible. Android is cool but WebOS is so much slicker and the user experience on Android does not come close.