1) Whether you think it's an apt comparison or not, don't ignore the free press WebOS and HP is getting just by comparing to Apple.
2) I'd think iPhone OS would be a better comparison since Apple didn't have another OS and the number of apps was considerably more limited since there wasn't an SDK and it not a decade old OS fork.
3) Off topic: has Sprint ever sponsored a marathon?
The free press is definitely a plus and if managed properly, could help HP a lot.
As far as comparing it to iOS when it was first released, it's a tough sell. The iOS experience was infinitely better than other market players at the time. WebOS is great but it isn't infinitely better. It does has a lot of visual polish, which is great, but the only true differentiator right now is the card based multitasking. It needs developer support as well as consumer interest. It isn't different enough to sway people from iOS right now. Does it have the potential to? Absolutely, but Apple and the rest of the competition for that matter, won't be standing still. They are trying to catch up to a mature platform (iOS and its developer tools) that is constantly improving.
The difference is OS X was version 1, this is version 3. Palm has a lot of good ideas, and if they beat Android to market back in the day they would have been the number 2 OS for sure, licensed and running on a miriad of devices. However, their version 3 product is 3 years late to market, it is slow, sluggish and big. I give Palm a lot of credit for what they are doing, but I just don't see webOS as anything other then an android skin at this point.
Whether you fan boys and girls like it or not, Web OS has potential. It will take time, let's say 3-4 years. But in the end, it will come.
It is indeed a marathon and if they improve the UI, make it stable and please developers, it'll be successful. You guys need a good reality check!!! etc etc
I am not sure it's the "you guys" that you refer to that need the reality check. Do you seriously think that Apple will be standing still in the next 3-4 years?!
Here's a thought experiment: go back 3-4 years and ask: what's happened in touch since then?
WebOS is so much better than Android in terms of a fit to the market and the users. Android is proprietary, invasive, and primarily only useful for the young techie males it's aimed at.
They are all proprietary, and they are all "open" to varying degrees.
WebOS is arguably the most open in that the focus is on open web-based apps. It has all of the (supposed) open-ness of Android (and more), without any of the downside.
They are all proprietary, and they are all "open" to varying degrees.
WebOS is arguably the most open in that the focus is on open web-based apps. It has all of the (supposed) open-ness of Android (and more), without any of the downside.
Huh? You're saying that because you can develop using web tools it's open? For years the programming language of choice for Windows was C, did that make windows open? There's nothing intrinsically closed about a development environment that compiles to native versus one that is interpreted. Objective C is in fact completely open - the compiler Apple use is an open source fork off from GCC.
The day that HP release WebOS as open source you can say it's as open as Android, until then it's just as proprietary as Apple.
I enjoyed seeing him working back with all my fellow NeXT colleagues but he's wrong assessing the popularity of the TouchPad to OS X.
The TouchPad is akin to a failed NeXTStation minus the technical prowess that was the NeXTStation relative to it's competition back in the day.
Jon never has been a visionary. He's a great engineer who knows how to execute the vision of others. He's also no salesman. It's not in his personality.
His need to try and be the next Steve is him overshooting his talents.
Huh? You're saying that because you can develop using web tools it's open? For years the programming language of choice for Windows was C, did that make windows open? There's nothing intrinsically closed about a development environment that compiles to native versus one that is interpreted. Objective C is in fact completely open - the compiler Apple use is an open source fork off from GCC.
The day that HP release WebOS as open source you can say it's as open as Android, until then it's just as proprietary as Apple.
With 10.7 the move to LLVM/Clang will be complete and the code is all open source.
Even ARC has become open inside LLVM's Source Tree. Apple is changing the landscape in the FOSS world with LLVM.
Just what I was thingking. Also I'm not super sure, but I think the 10.0 version was called a "beta" and was free (or $20 with a discount on the first paid release.)
10.0, Cheetah, was free and a public beta. 10.1, Puma, wasn't considered beta, but it was also free. 10.2, Jaguar, was the first version of OS X that was actually worth using as a primary system, but it wasn't free.
Seriously guys I love my Apple hardware but you guys have extremely short memories...
This is more about Palm's history than it is about the early days of OSX. I've been a palm developer for years and I see the same screw-ups they did back then, happening now.
I have zero faith in Rubenstein's ability to run it. Palm was dead in the water due to management's greed and incompetence. They screwed and abandoned their developers, got lazy, figured their Palm Treo's were the best thing since sliced bread, and flat-out did a RIM-job by sitting back and watching Apple / Android come out of nowhere and essentially shut them down.
Now comes WebOS. Admittedly a good mobile OS candidate. After the whole introduction hoopla (which I regret not buying Palm stock those first few months in 2009) and the iHaters calling it the iPhone killer, they introduce their WebOS phone that turns out to be a big turd. Flimsy quality, horrible battery life, keyboard that breaks after a few sentences. And Rubenstein's excuse? Bad timing. What a tool. Apparently, he refused to accept that he seriously ruined his one chance and once again, Palm was left on the vine to wither and die.
But wait... HP decided to hire Rubenstein's amazing ability to crash and burn, figuring he's obviously inept to run a company, maybe he could do better if he manages the tablet/WebOS unit instead.
And like dejavu all over again, he introduces the same piece of crap that is a bastard-child of the Palm Pre. Same build quality issues, and even with a few years of WebOS had to mature, it's still not ready for prime time.
I mean come-on!! I think WebOS had a better chance at competing with the iPhone in terms of OS potential, but Rubenstein just seems to be stuck in his glass office looking down at everyone and not noticing what the consumer does. He is as clueless now, as he was back then. I question his performance on the iPod. He was probably one of many people that contributed, but it wasn't his vision to get it going and make it successful.
When the Pre was announced, A friend I knew at Palm asked me to come back and develop for them. They were trying to extend an olive branch to all the developers they burned. She claimed Palm was really in a position again to be the top-dog in the mobile arena. I told her bluntly I would never contribute one iota of time to Palm ever again due to the way management ran that company. A few months after the Pre came out and got flushed down the toilet, she quit Palm quickly and told me later everything I told her that was wrong with the company has in fact remained the same. Rubenstein and his crowd of "yes men" alienated everyone that could make Palm a great company. Simple ignorance.
WebOS will be an asterisk in the history books as an OS that could have, should have, but in the end = "didn't have" what it took. So sad.
This is not an OSX story. Rubenstein is just slinging everything at the wall and hopes something sticks.
Hate that washed up PC maker with their cheap a** calculators.
Hey - those cheap a** calculators saved many an engineer's hid back in the day. Of course that was when H and P were still running the company and HP had top of the line measuring and test equipment. The crap began when Carly Flatulence bought her way into the top job.
When Apple brought out OS X, there was nothing quite like it. It was either System 9, Windows 3.1 (urghh!) or command line interfaces like DOS, *NIX etc. Of course, they all gave out bad review as it is new and nothing quite like it but now, we have iOS, Android and Windows 7 with all new ways of interacting with the machine, WebOS is mediocre. Didn't he read RIM anonymous letter to the board? Don't sent out products when they are not yet ready just because you want to be a 'me too' and quarterly report is coming. Has he lost his engineering skills all the years working with Apple?
The question, is HP going after the all encompassing consumer market or is their plan to bundle this with the enterprise business solutions similar to RIM is doing with their play book.
HP will run into stiff enterprise competition from Cisco's Cius tablet, which, though based on Android, will have some Cisco original apps, most especially TelePresence.
On a side note I find it ironic that Cisco is using Android instead of its own IOS (Internet Operating System) or even a license of iOS (which could have been part of the deal with Apple to allow Apple to use the name iOS).
Cisco will be aiming this directly at the enterprise with no anticipated penetration of the consumer market.
In other words, its OK to bring a new beast to the table, but WebOS does not have OS9 fall back. This would be like saying iOS in 2007 was like 10.0, and 10.1, it was not. It was fast, smooth, and slick, yeah there new features desired and they came along, but the version iOS1.0 was pretty good and operational on day 1. I know I got one and it just kept getting better and better.
So HP is doing the Rim and Google Android/Chrome, that is, release a beta and eventually release a final product version 1 in a year or so. Its ironic that MS is more like Apple in trying to get out a quality product versus a beta and let the users sort it out.
This is tough call, it takes time [Apple took years and a lot of money, ergo their being pissed with Samsung copycats not competing] to master the performance in the meantime Apple gobbles up market and worst keeps moving the goal posts with improvements.
So HP, RIM, and Google have chosen get to market and fix the product later. Hopefully, Apple's inability to meet demand will persuade users to grab a beta and live with it.
I do find it ironic that HP and RIM get poor to middling reviews on their products and Google with equally poor hardware/software on tablets gets a pass, 'grading on the curve."
Observations may be reviewers are now embarrassed by their leaning over backward on Google and nailing HP and RIM.
"Apple has followed the typical Apple sequence: (1) throw out something that’s popular and comfortable but increasingly ancient, (2) replace it with something that’s slick and modern and forward-looking and incomplete, (3) spend another year finishing it up, restoring missing pieces."
Jon never has been a visionary. He's a great engineer who knows how to execute the vision of others. He's also no salesman. It's not in his personality.
His need to try and be the next Steve is him overshooting his talents.
Comments
1) Whether you think it's an apt comparison or not, don't ignore the free press WebOS and HP is getting just by comparing to Apple.
2) I'd think iPhone OS would be a better comparison since Apple didn't have another OS and the number of apps was considerably more limited since there wasn't an SDK and it not a decade old OS fork.
3) Off topic: has Sprint ever sponsored a marathon?
The free press is definitely a plus and if managed properly, could help HP a lot.
As far as comparing it to iOS when it was first released, it's a tough sell. The iOS experience was infinitely better than other market players at the time. WebOS is great but it isn't infinitely better. It does has a lot of visual polish, which is great, but the only true differentiator right now is the card based multitasking. It needs developer support as well as consumer interest. It isn't different enough to sway people from iOS right now. Does it have the potential to? Absolutely, but Apple and the rest of the competition for that matter, won't be standing still. They are trying to catch up to a mature platform (iOS and its developer tools) that is constantly improving.
Whether you fan boys and girls like it or not, Web OS has potential. It will take time, let's say 3-4 years. But in the end, it will come.
It is indeed a marathon and if they improve the UI, make it stable and please developers, it'll be successful. You guys need a good reality check!!! etc etc
I am not sure it's the "you guys" that you refer to that need the reality check. Do you seriously think that Apple will be standing still in the next 3-4 years?!
Here's a thought experiment: go back 3-4 years and ask: what's happened in touch since then?
3) Off topic: has Sprint ever sponsored a marathon?
If I was on their PR team, I'd take that concept and run with it.....
WebOS is so much better than Android in terms of a fit to the market and the users. Android is proprietary, invasive, and primarily only useful for the young techie males it's aimed at.
You do get that WebOS is proprietary too right?
You do get that WebOS is proprietary too right?
They are all proprietary, and they are all "open" to varying degrees.
WebOS is arguably the most open in that the focus is on open web-based apps. It has all of the (supposed) open-ness of Android (and more), without any of the downside.
They are all proprietary, and they are all "open" to varying degrees.
WebOS is arguably the most open in that the focus is on open web-based apps. It has all of the (supposed) open-ness of Android (and more), without any of the downside.
Huh? You're saying that because you can develop using web tools it's open? For years the programming language of choice for Windows was C, did that make windows open? There's nothing intrinsically closed about a development environment that compiles to native versus one that is interpreted. Objective C is in fact completely open - the compiler Apple use is an open source fork off from GCC.
The day that HP release WebOS as open source you can say it's as open as Android, until then it's just as proprietary as Apple.
I enjoyed seeing him working back with all my fellow NeXT colleagues but he's wrong assessing the popularity of the TouchPad to OS X.
The TouchPad is akin to a failed NeXTStation minus the technical prowess that was the NeXTStation relative to it's competition back in the day.
Jon never has been a visionary. He's a great engineer who knows how to execute the vision of others. He's also no salesman. It's not in his personality.
His need to try and be the next Steve is him overshooting his talents.
Huh? You're saying that because you can develop using web tools it's open? For years the programming language of choice for Windows was C, did that make windows open? There's nothing intrinsically closed about a development environment that compiles to native versus one that is interpreted. Objective C is in fact completely open - the compiler Apple use is an open source fork off from GCC.
The day that HP release WebOS as open source you can say it's as open as Android, until then it's just as proprietary as Apple.
With 10.7 the move to LLVM/Clang will be complete and the code is all open source.
Even ARC has become open inside LLVM's Source Tree. Apple is changing the landscape in the FOSS world with LLVM.
Just what I was thingking. Also I'm not super sure, but I think the 10.0 version was called a "beta" and was free (or $20 with a discount on the first paid release.)
10.0, Cheetah, was free and a public beta. 10.1, Puma, wasn't considered beta, but it was also free. 10.2, Jaguar, was the first version of OS X that was actually worth using as a primary system, but it wasn't free.
Seriously guys I love my Apple hardware but you guys have extremely short memories...
This is more about Palm's history than it is about the early days of OSX. I've been a palm developer for years and I see the same screw-ups they did back then, happening now.
I have zero faith in Rubenstein's ability to run it. Palm was dead in the water due to management's greed and incompetence. They screwed and abandoned their developers, got lazy, figured their Palm Treo's were the best thing since sliced bread, and flat-out did a RIM-job by sitting back and watching Apple / Android come out of nowhere and essentially shut them down.
Now comes WebOS. Admittedly a good mobile OS candidate. After the whole introduction hoopla (which I regret not buying Palm stock those first few months in 2009) and the iHaters calling it the iPhone killer, they introduce their WebOS phone that turns out to be a big turd. Flimsy quality, horrible battery life, keyboard that breaks after a few sentences. And Rubenstein's excuse? Bad timing. What a tool. Apparently, he refused to accept that he seriously ruined his one chance and once again, Palm was left on the vine to wither and die.
But wait... HP decided to hire Rubenstein's amazing ability to crash and burn, figuring he's obviously inept to run a company, maybe he could do better if he manages the tablet/WebOS unit instead.
And like dejavu all over again, he introduces the same piece of crap that is a bastard-child of the Palm Pre. Same build quality issues, and even with a few years of WebOS had to mature, it's still not ready for prime time.
I mean come-on!! I think WebOS had a better chance at competing with the iPhone in terms of OS potential, but Rubenstein just seems to be stuck in his glass office looking down at everyone and not noticing what the consumer does. He is as clueless now, as he was back then. I question his performance on the iPod. He was probably one of many people that contributed, but it wasn't his vision to get it going and make it successful.
When the Pre was announced, A friend I knew at Palm asked me to come back and develop for them. They were trying to extend an olive branch to all the developers they burned. She claimed Palm was really in a position again to be the top-dog in the mobile arena. I told her bluntly I would never contribute one iota of time to Palm ever again due to the way management ran that company. A few months after the Pre came out and got flushed down the toilet, she quit Palm quickly and told me later everything I told her that was wrong with the company has in fact remained the same. Rubenstein and his crowd of "yes men" alienated everyone that could make Palm a great company. Simple ignorance.
WebOS will be an asterisk in the history books as an OS that could have, should have, but in the end = "didn't have" what it took. So sad.
This is not an OSX story. Rubenstein is just slinging everything at the wall and hopes something sticks.
They're share of the worlds tablet air space is 1% (50 times more than any of its competitors) as reported by AppleInsider just yesterday.
Actually the iPad has 1% of ALL WEB TRAFFIC, not 1% of the world's tablet air space, which is some feat!. Check again!
Hate that washed up PC maker with their cheap a** calculators.
Hey - those cheap a** calculators saved many an engineer's hid back in the day. Of course that was when H and P were still running the company and HP had top of the line measuring and test equipment. The crap began when Carly Flatulence bought her way into the top job.
When Apple brought out OS X, there was nothing quite like it. It was either System 9, Windows 3.1 (urghh!) or command line interfaces like DOS, *NIX etc. Of course, they all gave out bad review as it is new and nothing quite like it but now, we have iOS, Android and Windows 7 with all new ways of interacting with the machine, WebOS is mediocre. Didn't he read RIM anonymous letter to the board? Don't sent out products when they are not yet ready just because you want to be a 'me too' and quarterly report is coming. Has he lost his engineering skills all the years working with Apple?
The question, is HP going after the all encompassing consumer market or is their plan to bundle this with the enterprise business solutions similar to RIM is doing with their play book.
HP will run into stiff enterprise competition from Cisco's Cius tablet, which, though based on Android, will have some Cisco original apps, most especially TelePresence.
On a side note I find it ironic that Cisco is using Android instead of its own IOS (Internet Operating System) or even a license of iOS (which could have been part of the deal with Apple to allow Apple to use the name iOS).
Cisco will be aiming this directly at the enterprise with no anticipated penetration of the consumer market.
3) Off topic: has Sprint ever sponsored a marathon?
Ah, Soli, a true nugget in today's discussion! I have no idea but I'd ask the obverse: Has Marathon Gas ever sponsored a sprint?
In other words, its OK to bring a new beast to the table, but WebOS does not have OS9 fall back. This would be like saying iOS in 2007 was like 10.0, and 10.1, it was not. It was fast, smooth, and slick, yeah there new features desired and they came along, but the version iOS1.0 was pretty good and operational on day 1. I know I got one and it just kept getting better and better.
So HP is doing the Rim and Google Android/Chrome, that is, release a beta and eventually release a final product version 1 in a year or so. Its ironic that MS is more like Apple in trying to get out a quality product versus a beta and let the users sort it out.
This is tough call, it takes time [Apple took years and a lot of money, ergo their being pissed with Samsung copycats not competing] to master the performance in the meantime Apple gobbles up market and worst keeps moving the goal posts with improvements.
So HP, RIM, and Google have chosen get to market and fix the product later. Hopefully, Apple's inability to meet demand will persuade users to grab a beta and live with it.
I do find it ironic that HP and RIM get poor to middling reviews on their products and Google with equally poor hardware/software on tablets gets a pass, 'grading on the curve."
Observations may be reviewers are now embarrassed by their leaning over backward on Google and nailing HP and RIM.
"Apple has followed the typical Apple sequence: (1) throw out something that’s popular and comfortable but increasingly ancient, (2) replace it with something that’s slick and modern and forward-looking and incomplete, (3) spend another year finishing it up, restoring missing pieces."
David Pogue
http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/...nal-cut-pro-x/
Jon never has been a visionary. He's a great engineer who knows how to execute the vision of others. He's also no salesman. It's not in his personality.
His need to try and be the next Steve is him overshooting his talents.
The Peter Principle in action?
The Peter Principle in action?
He definitely sees something in the mirror that his history has proven to be just a mirage.