or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung rumored to buy webOS to compete with Apple's iOS, Mac OS X
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung rumored to buy webOS to compete with Apple's iOS, Mac OS X - Page 3

post #81 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by macinthe408 View Post

Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again whilst expecting different results.

HOWEVER, should Samsung make a 8.53" tablet, they might have something. Or a 10.65".

You're not thinking outside the box.

Samsung C.E.O.: Okay, guys. This is it. We're going to innovate now. We're going to create something big. Steve Jobs is out of the game, so we have to step up.

Design Lackey: But sir, that's hard.

Samsung C.E.O.: No buts! I don't want to leave this room until we come up with something Apple would NEVER do. Something SO radical, it completely redefines the entire tablet marketplace.

Design Lackey: Something like this, sir?

Samsung C.E.O.:… BRILLIANT! GET IT OUT THERE RIGHT NOW.

*six months later*

Commercial guy: Introducing…



Commercial guy: Samsung: Isosceleading the way.

And then Apple sues them for stealing their "Leading The Way" slogan from the '80s.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #82 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

GOOD! I love this. Hope it happens.

Palm: "Oh, we'll use WebOS to crap, we're out of business."

HP: "Oh, we'll use WebOS to crap, we're out of business."

Samsung: "Oh, we'll use WebOS to crap, we're..."

Before the iPhone came out, most of use just accepted that was the way cell phone worked. Then Apple came and blew that all out of the water. What Samsung, Google, Motorola, RIM etc. need to do is stop trying to catch up to Apple and come up with something that will change the whole paradigm again. Forget a touchscreen. How about a phone that can operate simply based on my thoughts (it is kinda crazy but people are working on it http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/1998/...n4694713.shtml) Coming up with something totally new (and that is well designed) is the way to go.
post #83 of 146
People who are only passionate about building hardware have no business making software.
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
post #84 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groovetube View Post

yeah we sure as hell wouldn't want competition now would we.

To be fair, it is clear that Apple and Google are the two dominant mobile phone players... and Microsoft is doing everything they can to also be relevant. Between those three, outside of the niche, I don't see a big need for a fourth option.

I'm not saying there shouldn't be other options, but if I were a company, I wouldn't buy WebOS as a strategy for rapid growth.
post #85 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulk001 View Post

Before the iPhone came out, most of use just accepted that was the way cell phone worked. Then Apple came and blew that all out of the water. What Samsung, Google, Motorola, RIM etc. need to do is stop trying to catch up to Apple and come up with something that will change the whole paradigm again. Forget a touchscreen. How about a phone that can operate simply based on my thoughts (it is kinda crazy but people are working on it http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/1998/...n4694713.shtml) Coming up with something totally new (and that is well designed) is the way to go.

In 97 steve said that to bet the future of the company in experimental research is absurd. He stated the goal was to bring what was already possible (multitouch was possible at the time iPhone launched) to the people with excellent execution.
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
post #86 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulk001 View Post

Before the iPhone came out, most of use just accepted that was the way cell phone worked. Then Apple came and blew that all out of the water. What Samsung, Google, Motorola, RIM etc. need to do is stop trying to catch up to Apple and come up with something that will change the whole paradigm again. Forget a touchscreen. How about a phone that can operate simply based on my thoughts (it is kinda crazy but people are working on it http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/1998/...n4694713.shtml) Coming up with something totally new (and that is well designed) is the way to go.

There will always be a general direction smartphones will be heading. Just look at laptops/PCs, they all look the same. Apple's approach to smartphones was different, but they did not invent touch screen phones.
iPad 3, Galaxy S4
Reply
iPad 3, Galaxy S4
Reply
post #87 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_lha View Post

For the record H-P never stated they were scrapping webOS software, only webOS hardware, so the article as written is inaccurate.

They have always stated that they planned to continue supporting the OS. Whether they live up to this promise is another question of course, especially as H-P seem to be on a path to self-destruction right now.

Thank you! I'm so tired of poor "journalism" nowadays. Headlines seem to be more and more misleading and the body of the articles seem to be more opinion (read: made up information) than fact these days. It's getting irritating.
post #88 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Youarewrong View Post

There will always be a general direction smartphones will be heading. Just look at laptops/PCs, they all look the same. Apple's approach to smartphones was different, but they did not invent touch screen phones.

That's correct. Apple just made them usable, and by extension, desirable. Implying there's only one way to make an interface for a touchscreen phone is absurd. Just as implying there's only one way to design a regular computer.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #89 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

may be the target that Samsung ahs the most interest in," the report said.

When you quote a source that contains an error, you note it with [sic]. Or maybe you didn't copy and paste and typed it wrong.
post #90 of 146
I think it would be pretty cool if Apples most non-innovative, copycat touch competitor transformed to offer one of the MOST unique offerings instead.
post #91 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Also note that it's actual sales as documented at the end of a quarter and then extracted to a per day average by dividing by 90 v. activations per day without any time frame reference given, without indicating actual sales, or how activations are counted (e.g.: Someone buys an Android-based device, activates it, hates it, returns it yet it's still counted -or- Someone buys an Android-based device, activates it, hates it, flashes it, sells it on Craig's List, someone else activates it).

I don't know why you're so concerned with unit sales since you've mentioned many times they're not really important, with profits the defining yardstick. But going with your discussion I seriously doubt that any large percentage of Android phones (or WM7 or Nokia), ie, 15% or more, are hated and returned. But give it a very liberal 25% (which would be economically ridiculous, but no matter for the sake of argument) and that still leaves at least 480K new Android smartphones getting in consumer's hands each day. And FWIW, not every iPhone that's "sold" by Apple is actually in a consumer's hands. We'll occasionally get mention of how many are in the channel (sitting in someone's inventory), but not very often.

Quite obviously Google can't tally channel sales from every manufacturer/reseller of Android devices since they'd be dealing with dozens of different reporting periods from dozens of different manufacturers, some more timely than others. Activations is the only thing they could realistically report isn't it, since that's probably the only thing they see with their own eyes? At the same time, it would seem pretty easy for Apple to publish actual consumer sales of both the 3GS and 4G individually if they wanted those figures known.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #92 of 146
I would think Samsung would rather be PAID by Microsoft to use Windows Phone 7 (as Nokia was) than shell out hundreds of millions for webOS.

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply
post #93 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh View Post

To be fair, it is clear that Apple and Google are the two dominant mobile phone players... and Microsoft is doing everything they can to also be relevant. Between those three, outside of the niche, I don't see a big need for a fourth option.

I'm not saying there shouldn't be other options, but if I were a company, I wouldn't buy WebOS as a strategy for rapid growth.

You are likely very right about that.
What I got... 15" i7 w/8 gigs ram,iPad2 64gig wifi, 2.0 mac mini, 2.0 17" imac, appleTv, Still running my old G4 466 upgraded to 1.2GHz maxed ram as a pro tools machine, and 2 iphones.
Reply
What I got... 15" i7 w/8 gigs ram,iPad2 64gig wifi, 2.0 mac mini, 2.0 17" imac, appleTv, Still running my old G4 466 upgraded to 1.2GHz maxed ram as a pro tools machine, and 2 iphones.
Reply
post #94 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I don't know why you're so concerned with unit sales since you've mentioned many times they're not really important, with profits the defining yardstick. But going with your discussion I seriously doubt that any large percentage of Android phones (or WM7 or Nokia), ie, 15% or more, are hated and returned. But give it a very liberal 25% (which would be economically ridiculous, but no matter for the sake of argument) and that still leaves at least 480K new Android smartphones getting in consumer's hands each day. And FWIW, not every iPhone that's "sold" by Apple is actually in a consumer's hands. We'll occasionally get mention of how many are in the channel (sitting in someone's inventory), but not very often.

Quite obviously Google can't tally channel sales from every manufacturer/reseller of Android devices since they'd be dealing with dozens of different reporting periods from dozens of different manufacturers, some more timely than others. Activations is the only thing they could realistically report isn't it, since that's probably the only thing they see with their own eyes? At the same time, it would seem pretty easy for Apple to publish actual consumer sales of both the 3GS and 4G individually if they wanted those figures known.

I'm concerned about unit sales when others are comparing the sales of a specific product (excluding other products) to activations. It's understood that this is how Google has to report Android, but they could be more transparent and the anti-Apple crowd could try to be a little more balanced by understanding that activations ≠ sales.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #95 of 146
Does Jon Rubenstein come in the package with a WebOS deal?

Either way, one or both are destined to become the "Typhoid Mary" of Mobile OSes.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #96 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Correction - HP is ALLEGEDLY selling the inventory. So far, I haven't seen any signs that they're actually shipping product. Their chat line told me today that the order status web page is broken and has been since Aug 23. WTF? Has ANYONE actually received their Touchpads from HP?

Apparently my one word reply is too short, so I'm adding this as padding, but in a word: Yes.
post #97 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post



I really hope you're right, but I'm not so sure.

The thing is, WebOS is actually a great OS, far better than Android in conception and execution. And Samsung, despite their complete lack of any moral sense, is a smart successful company that knows how to execute.

WebOS for Palm was a beyond last ditch effort when the clock had *already* struck midnight on them. WebOS for HP was a disaster because HP always f*cks things like that up. It has a long history of turning pearls into swine.

Samsung could actually succeed here.

@PP Ya' knocked that one out of the park!
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #98 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I'm concerned about unit sales when others are comparing the sales of a specific product (excluding other products) to activations. It's understood that this is how Google has to report Android, but they could be more transparent and the anti-Apple crowd could try to be a little more balanced by understanding that activations ≠ sales.

Fair enough.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #99 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonGurney View Post

I can't believe I'm actually going to say this.... but I hope Microsoft buys webOS.

All the old webos faithful have moved to WP7, as have most of their developers. WP7 is the most friendly to patching and tinkering, and the interface is most in tune with the webos way of doing things swiping, plus the people tile is similar to synergy (both people focused OS's basically etc).

I'm a bit biased cause I just want swipe up card view multitasking in WP7

But, what is the future of WP7 when Windows 8 for mobile is on the horizon -- aren't 2 mobile OSes, from one company, already 1 too many?
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #100 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

But, what is the future of WP7 when Windows 8 for mobile is on the horizon -- aren't 2 mobile OSes already 1 too many?

MS's strategy is different from Google and Apple's. WP7 is for Phones (hence the name Windows Phone 7), Windows 8 is for PCs and Tablets.

Hey at least it's not as confusing as Google's OS strategy (what's ChromeOS for again?)
post #101 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

My original comment alluded to the fact that WebOS seems to be the herpes of smartphone software. Whoever has it eventually has to snip off the affected areas or risk being done in by it. It meant nothing more than that.

I do believe you have nailed it -- as enticing as it [the host] may be HerpesOS is life threatening!
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #102 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Youarewrong View Post

There will always be a general direction smartphones will be heading.

I would respectfully disagree and think that this is why Apple succeeded - they turned the general direction on it's head in terms of design, features, price and usability. And they are doing it with their computer lines as well - the air has been around for some time now and companies are trying to play catchup instead of innovate because hey just think in terms of a general direction.
post #103 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_lha View Post

For the record H-P never stated they were scrapping webOS software, only webOS hardware, so the article as written is inaccurate.

They have always stated that they planned to continue supporting the OS. Whether they live up to this promise is another question of course, especially as H-P seem to be on a path to self-destruction right now.

And of course if you want to sell WebOS you should better say everybody it is great and you see a great future for it (just not in your own business).

It is a bit contradictory what HP is signaling. Though one must say that NeXT once did the same, stop hardware and go on with the software. But that only became a success when they were bought by Apple thus marrying hard- and software again.

I still think there are possible other candidates that have much bigger software weaknesses in their offering (or no software worth mentioning), e.g. Sony, Sony Ericsson, Nintendo, Intel, Amazon, Barnes&Noble....
post #104 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groovetube View Post

yeah we sure as hell wouldn't want competition now would we.

Heh. "Competition" is androidspeak for "copy"

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #105 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

You're not thinking outside the box.


This is so funny on many levels!
post #106 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by grmac View Post

Those that are currently engaged in an enterprise "relationship" with HP are fully aware of their bottom-tier status, and are reminded of it daily. Where else can it take more than five days to execute a chmod?

Try IBM
post #107 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by talksense101 View Post

Bada is a replacement for Samsung's proprietary OS that is meant to run on the low end devices. Not on the overpowered devices that run Android.

Microsoft should buy Bada instead and include Bing search, then call the whole thing Bada-Bing!

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #108 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

Microsoft should buy Bada instead and include Bing search, then call the whole thing Bada-Bing!



*rimshot*

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #109 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

^^This

None will destroy the other.

Through innovation at least. The only way to destroy Android is through litigation. As even if Apple truly owns the top tier market Android still won't fade.

I disagree!

By buying MMI, Google sends a message to Android licensees, that Google is now in a position to compete with them. Not only that, Moogle has access to parts of Android that are not accessible to its licensee. Moogle, if it chooses, can go into competition with Android phone manufactures -- and it can develop, tune and reserve Android features to Moogle hardware.

Some have suggested Google must make handsets to recoup their $12.5 Billion purchase of MMI:
-- selling the Handset division without the patents makes little sense to a potential buyer
-- killing the handset division means it would take a decade to recoup its investment
-- charging a license fee per handset may drive away Android licensees
-- MMI patents may not be powerful enough to deflect litigation facing Google

AIR, Google pays MMI $2.5 Billion if it backs out of the deal.

Even if Google cuts its losses -- the message has already ben sent to Android Licensees.

So, Google may have gotten itself into a position where anything it does will make the situation worse -- Nice work, Larry!
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #110 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

I disagree!

By buying MMI, Google sends a message to Android licensees, that Google is now in a position to compete with them. Not only that, Moogle has access to parts of Android that are not accessible to its licensee. Moogle, if it chooses, can go into competition with Android phone manufactures -- and it can develop, tune and reserve Android features to Moogle hardware.

Some have suggested Google must make handsets to recoup their $12.5 Billion purchase of MMI:
-- selling the Handset division without the patents makes little sense to a potential buyer
-- killing the handset division means it would take a decade to recoup its investment
-- charging a license fee per handset may drive away Android licensees
-- MMI patents may not be powerful enough to deflect litigation facing Google

AIR, Google pays MMI $2.5 Billion if it backs out of the deal.

Even if Google cuts its losses -- the message has already ben sent to Android Licensees.

So, Google may have gotten itself into a position where anything it does will make the situation worse -- Nice work, Larry!

Maybe they bought Moto so they back up the vendors that want to use Android. (hahahahaha)
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #111 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Wrong. The only way to destroy Android is if Google becomes a manufacturer of smartphones.

Wait. What?! Oh yeah... that already happened.

I give Android 2 more good years.

show me a Google built phone...I'll be waiting
post #112 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

show me a Google built phone...I'll be waiting

Sure, just wait until the Motorola Mobility buy-out is approved. Despite Google's insistence of "we're going to run Motorola like a separate company", does anyone really believe that its Mobile phones won't have an edge over other companies Android phones, much like the current Nexus branded phones do right now, and that eventually Motorola Mobility will disappear into Google. Sure they might put up this pretense to start with, but eventually they're going to realize that having control over the software and hardware gives them an edge over Apple and others.
post #113 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

\

I want Samsung gone because they refuse to compete. I want actual competition more than all the people who whine that Apple is trying to become a monopoly by suing everyone.

They're suing because no one else is actually innovating. They're copying line for line from Apple's designs, both hardware (list of hardware manufacturers here) and software (Android and any OEM UI overlays).

That's why I love Windows Phone 7 even though I abhor everything else Microsoft has ever done (though I do respect that they've done online gaming right. Way better than either Sony or Nintendo's solutions). Windows Phone 7 is completely different from iOS. They actually did something that wasn't a blatant photocopy of Apple's stuff.

The hardware? Looks like iPhone hardware, but Microsoft's not in charge of that.

But that's beside the point.

My original comment alluded to the fact that WebOS seems to be the herpes of smartphone software. Whoever has it eventually has to snip off the affected areas or risk being done in by it. It meant nothing more than that.


I'm in total agreement with you -- and I usually hate Microsoft apps.

With Windows Phone -- they at LEAST are trying to innovate -- but I think it's not going to be enough.

Samsung has done nothing but be a cloner for a long time -- they just copy everybody else and refine the process.

They are NOT the company that is going to do much with WebOS.

>> I think WebOS has a good future -- but more as a "business solutions" platform that can run on top of other phones, browsers and operating systems. The problem isn't it's quality -- it's "mindshare" -- and I figure that developers are going to do iOS or Android first and then branch out from there. Some old-time Microsoft shops are going to do Windows Phone 7 -- but those are companies that have been churning out "whatever" in Visual Basic for a decade. But those are "solution providers" -- and they might use something like WebOS.

There is a market for the corporate programmers, who are not really that gifted but they are trying to solve problems for their own companies -- so there needs to be a Visual Basic for phones that can mesh with the desktop. WebOS could carve out a nitch there.

But Samsung would probably do another me-to smartphone/tablet. I'm also guessing they will give Acer a run for their money on crapware loaded PCs.
post #114 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Wrong. The only way to destroy Android is if Google becomes a manufacturer of smartphones.

Wait. What?! Oh yeah... that already happened.

I give Android 2 more good years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

I disagree!

By buying MMI, Google sends a message to Android licensees, that Google is now in a position to compete with them. Not only that, Moogle has access to parts of Android that are not accessible to its licensee. Moogle, if it chooses, can go into competition with Android phone manufactures -- and it can develop, tune and reserve Android features to Moogle hardware.

Some have suggested Google must make handsets to recoup their $12.5 Billion purchase of MMI:
-- selling the Handset division without the patents makes little sense to a potential buyer
-- killing the handset division means it would take a decade to recoup its investment
-- charging a license fee per handset may drive away Android licensees
-- MMI patents may not be powerful enough to deflect litigation facing Google

AIR, Google pays MMI $2.5 Billion if it backs out of the deal.

Even if Google cuts its losses -- the message has already ben sent to Android Licensees.

So, Google may have gotten itself into a position where anything it does will make the situation worse -- Nice work, Larry!

Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_lha View Post

Sure, just wait until the Motorola Mobility buy-out is approved. Despite Google's insistence of "we're going to run Motorola like a separate company", does anyone really believe that its Mobile phones won't have an edge over other companies Android phones, much like the current Nexus branded phones do right now, and that eventually Motorola Mobility will disappear into Google. Sure they might put up this pretense to start with, but eventually they're going to realize that having control over the software and hardware gives them an edge over Apple and others.

sounds like a crapload of speculation fueled by your intense hatred of anything non-Apple to me.
post #115 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

show me a Google built phone...I'll be waiting

My guess is that Google picked up Motorolla's cell phone PATENTS so they could use them to defend against patent lawsuits.

Sure -- it's not really anything involving Android -- but if Apple or some other company sues them on the software they MIGHT sue them on the hardware.

The OTHER angle Google might take is creating a "Carrier free" phone -- it's a hedge against something like AT&T + T-Mobile gobbling up cell towers. You could create wire-less only phones, or pick up G3 when available. MOST of us now have wireless at the office and home -- it's only inbetween when we don't have fast access we could piggy-back off of. So some arrangement with one of the B-List city cell phone companies could cover the lower bandwidth phone calls.

I don't think Google is going to come out with an Android Phone and compete directly against their own licensors --- but you never know. Personally, I think it would KILL Android if they did and give Microsoft or WebOS a chance.
post #116 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fake_William_Shatner View Post

My guess is that Google picked up Motorolla's cell phone PATENTS so they could use them to defend against patent lawsuits.

Sure -- it's not really anything involving Android -- but if Apple or some other company sues them on the software they MIGHT sue them on the hardware.

The OTHER angle Google might take is creating a "Carrier free" phone -- it's a hedge against something like AT&T + T-Mobile gobbling up cell towers. You could create wire-less only phones, or pick up G3 when available. MOST of us now have wireless at the office and home -- it's only inbetween when we don't have fast access we could piggy-back off of. So some arrangement with one of the B-List city cell phone companies could cover the lower bandwidth phone calls.

I don't think Google is going to come out with an Android Phone and compete directly against their own licensors --- but you never know. Personally, I think it would KILL Android if they did and give Microsoft or WebOS a chance.

Google going vertical would decimate Android beyond repair. I know I'm not alone here but I kinda wish they would. at the same time though I don't trust Google's design paradigm. if they even have one.
post #117 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

By buying MMI, Google sends a message to Android licensees, that Google is now in a position to compete with them.

I don't think any of us know what message Google has sent to the Open Handset Alliance members. I'd be pretty surprised if they made their communications with them public.

Quote:
Some have suggested Google must make handsets to recoup their $12.5 Billion purchase of MMI. . .

And some have suggested that they were concerned only with the patents.Some have suggested it's more about the cable boxes. It will be some time before there's any clear indications which camp is correct, or if any of them are.

But your opinion on what Google will actually do may be perfectly correct when all is said and done. Or all of us may be way off-base. Some commenters are making the assumption that Google just isn't very smart and hasn't mapped out a direction. Bad assumption IMHO.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #118 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

show me a Google built phone...I'll be waiting

Show me Google truly embracing "open" by releasing all their search algorithms... I'll be waiting.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #119 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

show me a Google built phone...I'll be waiting

When Google signs on the dotted line consider anything from MotoMobility to be a Google phone.

I can't see Google pissing $2.5 billion down the drain so I'd consider the deal as done.

Android has only 2 good years left and then it's cooked. LG will be gone from Android. Samsung will be gone from Android. Windows Phone will be gaining market share. Larry will be having his way with Android. ... and Google will have to go head to head with Apple.

iPhone 6 or 7 against Motorola Whatever.

That walled garden will start looking better and better to Page and Brin.

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #120 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

sounds like a crapload of speculation fueled by your intense hatred of anything non-Apple to me.

I'll match my, and Island Hermit's reasoned, and unbiased posting records against yours any day...

... I don't know enough about dr_lha to comment on his.


As to speculation, I am just analyzing Google's options -- of course that is speculation.

What do you think Google will do?


As to the chilling effect on Android licensees -- I have recently read articles about Sammy executives and South Korean Govt. officials urging [South Korean handset makers] to get off the Android train.

I will try to run them down and post links later, in an update.

Edit 1: Here's a link to an article, though not the best, showing Sammy's concern about the MMI purchase:

Elaboration system of Samsung Bada or abandon the Android development itself


Edit 2: Here's a link about the South Korean Governmant:

South Korean Government Urges Samsung And LG To Forsake Android: "We Cannot Go On Like This"



As to "intense hatred of anything non-Apple". That is overstated! I like non-apple products, and dislike some Apple products/choices.

I do not trust MS, because of personal dealings. I do not like Google because of their unethical, if not illegal, practices -- while flaunting their "Do No Evil" mantra.

Sammy, appears to make good products, but I do not respect them -- it appears as if they are violating the IP of others.


I choose to support and do business with those I trust, like, and respect!

How about you?


And... I like New York in June... How about you?

"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung rumored to buy webOS to compete with Apple's iOS, Mac OS X