I wonder how much extra it would cost to have the patents tastefully presented on a platter bearing Jon Rubenstein's head.
With the current ethics of the U.S.'s corporate world, both successful and unsuccessful high level execs get paid about the same. You win just by playing the game. Whoo-hoo!
I'm confused. Where in this article (or the conference call notes) does HP CEO even talk at all about Apple, let alone the iPad?
This seems like a case of the title already being written, and formulating an article to fit that title.
Does the CEO of a failing venture need to spell it out? Anybody watching the industry can clearly see what's happening. Apple is cleaning house in the tablet and phone (to a lesser extent) businesses.
HP sounds like they completely lost their direction and ability to innovate across any of their products. I know on the software side and technical support they are not doing so well there either so good luck with your new path HP. You'll need it!
I think the current high valuation for patents is a big part of the reason HP is scrapping WebOS so quickly. They now know WebOS products are money losers and probably hope to get some of that original $1.2 billion Palm purchase back by selling the patents ASAP.
Some of it? The amount patents are selling for now, HP could even turn in a profit.
Web OS was never going to work for HP. WebOS is decent, but was too late to market. It failed in Palm's time because the momentum of support amongst developers wasn't there. Even those developers who had supported the classic Palm OS for years were deserting it, and switching to iOS and Android. HP was never going to be able to do any better, because the clock had ticked on further.
This is sad in a way. I don't think it's good for Apple, who would compete better in a fragmented market than against a single competitive platform supported by numerous hardware vendors. And imo WebOS was the best of the rest. Had it had the apps it would have been a more worthy competitor than Android.
in my opinion you hire a bunch of hacks that have more expertise in corporate mergers and spin offs than in engineering and science. hp was infamous for bleeding edge electrical engineering and technological advances. When they spun off Agilent and became just a computer company , they sold off the very core of hp that made the brand famous, the stuff that creates new products and new markets. I'm sure the quarterly earnings boost resulted in juicy over bonuses for those who crafted it, those who brokered the shares, and those who received the commissions, special cash out transactions and origination fees...... Alas like any bell curve would tell you, the PC business and by extension the wireless still borns that link their existence to the PC experience, these tablets will all eventually end up on internet auction sites or crated up and donated to some charitable cause somewhere on the planet. Doubling down on that strategy by trying to buy back intellectual property and innovation [tied to a losing paradigm] is a recipe for failure. Innovation in engineering is only grown organically, takes years to develop, and takes leadership and vision. It burns tons of cash, but what everyone loses site of, the R&D pays off in new markets and products in spades. hp would have better spent the money buying back Agilent. In my opinion the prognosis for Google and Motorola Mobile is no better. Its like watching the fate of Humpty Dumpty on the operating table.
Apple has grown organically, fosters innovation, and is smiling all the way to the top. LOL
He fixed it, but my experience having read AI for a long time is that this author doesn't proofread very well, and it appears no one at AI does it for him. His record is 5 typos in one article! Otherwise, a lot of the writing is good.
Um, apparently you guys were reading a different article than I was.
1) HP still turns a very substantial profit. Even their home computing arm turned a tidy profit of $550m+ according to the article. The only issue was the profit margin. So HP is spinning it off. That simply means, essentially, that they are separating it from the HP mothership and setting it up as a separate entity. this is usually done to make a sale of the company easier. No one is going bankrupt. The computer production operation will, however, probably be sold in the next year or two.
2) HP's Business operations are highly profitable. That is why HP is refocusing on business operations (and printer production).
3) The touchpad was a flop. That is undisputed. So the HP is pulling the plub on webOS entirely. That doesn't mean that the whole company is exploding. It means that they are cutting their losses, and that they may deem other parts of their Palm acquisition as being more readily profitable if simply sold off.
3) The touchpad was a flop. That is undisputed. So the HP is pulling the plub on webOS entirely. That doesn't mean that the whole company is exploding. It means that they are cutting their losses, and that they may deem other parts of their Palm acquisition as being more readily profitable if simply sold off.
WebOS was doomed from the start IMO. not that it wasn't an interesting (or even great) OS, it was. but first they launched it on Sprint exclusively, with one of the WORST advertising campaigns in recent memory past the local car dealer ones. They also waited a really long time before releasing it to the public and pushed it out on woefully underpowered (for the OS) hardware that was cheap to boot. The phones were also SMALL, which didn't help.
And then they launched on ATT/Verizon with another horrible campaign. And announced the pre2 soon after this launch, which killed their own sales. And then they announced the touchpad/pre3 and said NONE of the old phones would get the updated OS.
Fast forward several months and the first webos3 phone that came out was the Veer, which again features inferior hardware and was just tiny. The touchpad came out weeks later, but the OS wasn't baked fully yet and there wasn't a lot you could do with it (even though the core OS is apparently amazing) The Pre3, the "awesome phone" that would integrate with the touchpad isn't even out yet. and both of these (AGAIN!) had lackluster hardware. I'm not talking about having "OMG specs" I'm talking simple things like build quality, screen resolution, and the ability to handle the OS without grinding to a halt.
Yes, the touchpad was a flop, but a lot of the blame for that can be placed on Palm/HP
I try to give credit where it is due, and I get insulted. Seemingly, no good deed goes unpunished.
And how am I either hoping for the best or blaming anybody for anything? And what does the NYT article have to do with anything?
This?
" In an interview, HP CEO Leo Apotheker said the company was disappointed more with the hardware sales than the performance of the webOS software, which it will try to keep alive in some way. HP is studying its options, which could include licensing the software to handset makers or allowing them to use it for free as open-source software, as Google does with Android."
Some of it? The amount patents are selling for now, HP could even turn in a profit.
Web OS was never going to work for HP. WebOS is decent, but was too late to market. It failed in Palm's time because the momentum of support amongst developers wasn't there. Even those developers who had supported the classic Palm OS for years were deserting it, and switching to iOS and Android. HP was never going to be able to do any better, because the clock had ticked on further.
This is sad in a way. I don't think it's good for Apple, who would compete better in a fragmented market than against a single competitive platform supported by numerous hardware vendors. And imo WebOS was the best of the rest. Had it had the apps it would have been a more worthy competitor than Android.
ignorant. the web os didn't have any apps because they didnt release a timely sdk, and when they did it sucked in comparison to what android, iOS, or windows had. They needed to focus on hardware acceleration, canvas, svg, hell even flash, and then they'd have something developers could write to. An app that's a web page is just a web page. It's a fundamentally stupid play because even if you make it for web os, there's nothing locking the app to the platform.
Comments
I wonder how much extra it would cost to have the patents tastefully presented on a platter bearing Jon Rubenstein's head.
With the current ethics of the U.S.'s corporate world, both successful and unsuccessful high level execs get paid about the same. You win just by playing the game. Whoo-hoo!
Apple should make an offer for Palm's IP.
I am certain that was what the Head of HP was trying to say without actually saying it...
Also it has been my experience that HP software is usually very poor quality.... I am not sure I would want to bet the company on it.....
I'm confused. Where in this article (or the conference call notes) does HP CEO even talk at all about Apple, let alone the iPad?
This seems like a case of the title already being written, and formulating an article to fit that title.
Does the CEO of a failing venture need to spell it out? Anybody watching the industry can clearly see what's happening. Apple is cleaning house in the tablet and phone (to a lesser extent) businesses.
Nicely done, DED. Much better than the last one. Keep it up!
Get on with your (passive-aggressive, with a fake name) life, instead of hoping for the best or blaming others: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2011...y.html?_r=1&hp
I'm confused. Where in this article (or the conference call notes) does HP CEO even talk at all about Apple, let alone the iPad?
This seems like a case of the title already being written, and formulating an article to fit that title.
They said competition from tablets, which means Apple and the iPad. You think they were talking about competition from the Galaxy Tab?
I think the current high valuation for patents is a big part of the reason HP is scrapping WebOS so quickly. They now know WebOS products are money losers and probably hope to get some of that original $1.2 billion Palm purchase back by selling the patents ASAP.
Some of it? The amount patents are selling for now, HP could even turn in a profit.
Web OS was never going to work for HP. WebOS is decent, but was too late to market. It failed in Palm's time because the momentum of support amongst developers wasn't there. Even those developers who had supported the classic Palm OS for years were deserting it, and switching to iOS and Android. HP was never going to be able to do any better, because the clock had ticked on further.
This is sad in a way. I don't think it's good for Apple, who would compete better in a fragmented market than against a single competitive platform supported by numerous hardware vendors. And imo WebOS was the best of the rest. Had it had the apps it would have been a more worthy competitor than Android.
Apple has grown organically, fosters innovation, and is smiling all the way to the top. LOL
Signed,
A converted former PC believer...LOL...
A little proof-reading please...
He fixed it, but my experience having read AI for a long time is that this author doesn't proofread very well, and it appears no one at AI does it for him. His record is 5 typos in one article! Otherwise, a lot of the writing is good.
I'm confused. Where in this article (or the conference call notes) does HP CEO even talk at all about Apple, let alone the iPad?
This seems like a case of the title already being written, and formulating an article to fit that title.
emphasis mine.
See the Author slug? That's how 100% of his 'articles' are written.
1) HP still turns a very substantial profit. Even their home computing arm turned a tidy profit of $550m+ according to the article. The only issue was the profit margin. So HP is spinning it off. That simply means, essentially, that they are separating it from the HP mothership and setting it up as a separate entity. this is usually done to make a sale of the company easier. No one is going bankrupt. The computer production operation will, however, probably be sold in the next year or two.
2) HP's Business operations are highly profitable. That is why HP is refocusing on business operations (and printer production).
3) The touchpad was a flop. That is undisputed. So the HP is pulling the plub on webOS entirely. That doesn't mean that the whole company is exploding. It means that they are cutting their losses, and that they may deem other parts of their Palm acquisition as being more readily profitable if simply sold off.
3) The touchpad was a flop. That is undisputed. So the HP is pulling the plub on webOS entirely. That doesn't mean that the whole company is exploding. It means that they are cutting their losses, and that they may deem other parts of their Palm acquisition as being more readily profitable if simply sold off.
WebOS was doomed from the start IMO. not that it wasn't an interesting (or even great) OS, it was. but first they launched it on Sprint exclusively, with one of the WORST advertising campaigns in recent memory past the local car dealer ones. They also waited a really long time before releasing it to the public and pushed it out on woefully underpowered (for the OS) hardware that was cheap to boot. The phones were also SMALL, which didn't help.
And then they launched on ATT/Verizon with another horrible campaign. And announced the pre2 soon after this launch, which killed their own sales. And then they announced the touchpad/pre3 and said NONE of the old phones would get the updated OS.
Fast forward several months and the first webos3 phone that came out was the Veer, which again features inferior hardware and was just tiny. The touchpad came out weeks later, but the OS wasn't baked fully yet and there wasn't a lot you could do with it (even though the core OS is apparently amazing) The Pre3, the "awesome phone" that would integrate with the touchpad isn't even out yet. and both of these (AGAIN!) had lackluster hardware. I'm not talking about having "OMG specs" I'm talking simple things like build quality, screen resolution, and the ability to handle the OS without grinding to a halt.
Yes, the touchpad was a flop, but a lot of the blame for that can be placed on Palm/HP
HP PC bites the dust.
Dell next. Then Microsoft.
Apple used to be the most expensive (Wives Tail).
Now they are the least expensive. The computer builders simply cannot build clones of Apple at a cheaper cost.
It is all Technology
Apple first bought LCD technology eight years ago.
Since then they have invested in:
1) Super strength aluminum metals.
2) One piece aluminum milling machines.
3) Form fitting layered batteries.
4) Low power multi-thread processor chips.
5) Hardware and software optimized architectures.
Whether iPads or computers the costs for the same features cannot be beat even with zero margins by the rush to the bottom competitors.
Plug and play parts in plastic ugly containers simply will not sell.
Microsoft will be next.
Microsoft is stopping support for Windows XP so that corporations (50 percent of who still use the old computers) will be forced to buy new computers.
Sorry, at least half of them will buy the new better and lower cost Apple computers.
All the creative companies already do.
Just Saying
Microsoft is stopping support for Windows XP so that corporations (50 percent of who still use the old computers) will be forced to buy new computers.
No, they're doing it because it's a DECADE OLD and NO ONE should be using decade-old software.
I have cousins who haven't been around as long as XP has, for heaven's sake.
Now wait until the rest of these fools in the pc world fall into obscurity.Apple had it right all along and the proof is in the declining pc paradigm.
I wonder what Jon Rubinstein is doing right now.
Probably putting red lip stick and a blond wig on that remington 22 gauge shot gun.
Get on with your (passive-aggressive, with a fake name) life, instead of hoping for the best or blaming others: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2011...y.html?_r=1&hp
I try to give credit where it is due, and I get insulted. Seemingly, no good deed goes unpunished.
And how am I either hoping for the best or blaming anybody for anything? And what does the NYT article have to do with anything?
This?
" In an interview, HP CEO Leo Apotheker said the company was disappointed more with the hardware sales than the performance of the webOS software, which it will try to keep alive in some way. HP is studying its options, which could include licensing the software to handset makers or allowing them to use it for free as open-source software, as Google does with Android."
WTF? Are you just trolling me?
Some of it? The amount patents are selling for now, HP could even turn in a profit.
Web OS was never going to work for HP. WebOS is decent, but was too late to market. It failed in Palm's time because the momentum of support amongst developers wasn't there. Even those developers who had supported the classic Palm OS for years were deserting it, and switching to iOS and Android. HP was never going to be able to do any better, because the clock had ticked on further.
This is sad in a way. I don't think it's good for Apple, who would compete better in a fragmented market than against a single competitive platform supported by numerous hardware vendors. And imo WebOS was the best of the rest. Had it had the apps it would have been a more worthy competitor than Android.
ignorant. the web os didn't have any apps because they didnt release a timely sdk, and when they did it sucked in comparison to what android, iOS, or windows had. They needed to focus on hardware acceleration, canvas, svg, hell even flash, and then they'd have something developers could write to. An app that's a web page is just a web page. It's a fundamentally stupid play because even if you make it for web os, there's nothing locking the app to the platform.