Wow 22nd post and you couldn't be further off, PALM used newtons technology for handwriting, they just paid apple to license it. So you make a statement, calling someone else out, yet you are clueless. KK you can probably leave now.
I can't find anything that says this is true. Some information I've found suggests that Palm might have licenced Grafitti to Apple after Apple's first try at handwriting recognition failed. This was before Palm started making their own devices. Palm did have to pay someone for it the technology, but that was Xerox, not Apple, because of a patent Xerox filed.
Palm was developing for other company's PDAs at that time, including Newton.
In September 1994, Palm debuted its Graffiti handwriting recognition software. Until that time, users of personal digital assistants usually entered information by choosing selections on a tiny screen with a little plastic stylus. Adding any kind of practical keyboard would make the devices too large to carry in one's pocket. Apple's Newton already had a limited handwriting recognition capability, but Palm's Graffiti could be used for taking notes or sending e-mail. It boasted 100 percent accuracy and a speed to rival typing.
Quote:
Palm offered the software for the Newton, Magic Cap, and other PDAs. Giant modem manufacturer U.S. Robotics, based in Skokie, Illinois, acquired Palm in September 1995 for $44 million. Palm was based in Los Altos, California.
I can't find anything that says this is true. Some information I've found suggests that Palm might have licenced Grafitti to Apple after Apple's handwriting recognition failed. This was before Palm started making their own devices. Palm did have to pay someone for it the technology, but that was Xerox, not Apple, because of a patent Xerox filed.
Palm was developing for other company's PDAs before Newton was introduced.
This isn't entirely correct. I've got friends that owned Newtons, one of which whom still uses his.
I remember the Newton with the last OS as having quite complex recognition, and doing very well at it, certainly as good as Graffiti.
Even the very first OS had sophisticated recognition, even though you had to spend time training the device. Problem was, most people didn't want to take the time, and so it didn't work well. Like voice recognition. No trainie, no workie.
I also remember them TRYING to sell Graffiti to Apple, but didn't succeed.
It's really too bad about the Newton. The 2100 was a really fine machine, and far better than the Palm. Two strikes against it though.
Despite its much more sophisticated hardware and OS, it was too big and too expensive.
Still, when Jobs discontinued it, sales had gone well above where they had been, and people were thinking that it would be a success.
The OS was very sophisticated. All programs and info were kept in a "sea", where they could be recalled at once, and could be used to form new types of programs from snippets. You could get various little packages, and use them as if they were part of one program.
I can't imagine what it would look like today after so many years of development of the hardware and software. No one else would be close.
This isn't entirely correct. I've got friends that owned Newtons, one of which whom still uses his.
I remember the Newton with the last OS as having quite complex recognition, and doing very well at it, certainly as good as Graffiti.
(snip)
I can't imagine what it would look like today after so many years of development of the hardware and software. No one else would be close.
Too bad.
The Palm was a toy in comparison.
Fair enough, I found and corrected some other mistakes in my post, but I'll leave it as it is now. It's hard finding good information on this.
My guess is that Pilot succeeded because it didn't try to do too much, and as such, could keep a small size and better price. Palm did what I needed it to do and the models I've owned actually fit in my pockets.
I don't recall if Palm was promoting it as an iPhone "killer" or not.
McNamee did but then Palm?s lawyers issued a retraction. He never said the term ?iPhone killer? but the sentiment was clear. His comments were hyperbolic enough that I wonder if it wasn?t completely staged to help draw more free media attention.
Step 1: Make outlandish statements about how your device is so much better than competitor.
Result 1: Generate free press.
Step 2: Issue retraction stating that what was said is necessary true.
Result 2: Generate free press.
Maybe he was just overzealous but it just seemed like a PT Barnum move.
Well, what I really wonder is when the first developer will port the WebOS GUI on top of iPhones WebKit engine. it would surely be possible to mimic it there pretty close.
iPhone OS 3.0s HTML 5 implementation now brings offline storage, audio background streaming is already there with Safari, so to have WebOS style "multitasking" on iPhone is to go just one step further for the most part. Which goes to show that the iPhone is more capable than the Prē, because then there are 50,000 apps besides Safari to explore and 3,000+ iPhone web apps already.
But seriously, Palm and Apple were once laying the ground for mobile information devices (aka PDAs) and are now at the forefront again for advancing the state of mobile phone and internet usage. And both really do not compete vs. each other but against the stalwarts of yesterday (Symbian) and wannabe 80% share holders (WiMo). And that is a good thing for everyone.
So kudos to Palm (which seeing where most of the engineers and their CEO came from, really now is "Apple II".. ;-)
McNamee did but then Palm’s lawyers issued a retraction. He never said the term “iPhone killer’ but the sentiment was clear. His comments were hyperbolic enough that I wonder if it wasn’t completely staged to help draw more free media attention.
Step 1: Make outlandish statements about how your device is so much better than competitor.
Result 1: Generate free press.
Step 2: Issue retraction stating that what was said is necessary true.
Result 2: Generate free press.
Maybe he was just overzealous but it just seemed like a PT Barnum move.
Maybe getting that kind of attention works to an extent. Whether this kind of marketing works to sell a few more units or is just an ill-conceived plan based on faulty conventional wisdom, it keeps happening. I don't think anyone has said whether or not they've found it actually works.
It's getting annoying, but then, most marketing annoys me. Apple's marketing is often no exception.
Well, what I really wonder is when the first developer will port the WebOS GUI on top of iPhones WebKit engine. it would surely be possible to mimic it there pretty close.
And what would be the point exactly? It's not like webOS applications are web pages, webOS devs aren't in the situation iPhone devs for the first 12 months, they have access to the hardware through pretty normal APIs. It's just that these APIs are called via javascript (think Firefox, or OSX widgets) and the UI is written in (extended) HTML & CSS (once again, think Firefox's chrome, or widgets, or even Safari's developer tools which are written using HTML, CSS and JS)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlK
so to have WebOS style "multitasking" on iPhone is to go just one step further for the most part.
What?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlK
Which goes to show that the iPhone is more capable than the Prē, because then there are 50,000 apps besides Safari to explore and 3,000+ iPhone web apps already.
Uh no, this and that are completely unrelated. It mostly goes to show that the iPhone has a ~16 months headstart on apps (since the SDK was released to developers in March 2008) and a 24 months headstart on webapps.
That's a place where Palm dropped the ball (though they've never been big about third-party devs, which might lead to their downfall in the end): Mojo (the webOS SDK) still hasn't been publicly released and is still "early access" (you have to apply for it and you may or may not get accepted).
On the one hand, it took Apple a full year to release their SDK; on the other hand Apple's SDK is here right now (and was built using tools well known to OSX developers) so the landscape has changed and the lack of an SDK will probably hurt Palm soon.
edit: oh yeah, webOS/Pre is far superior to iPhoneOS/iPhone on the OS update side: it can update transparently over the air, downloading the updates in the background when the phone isn't busy, that's pretty damn sweet and much less intrusive than Apple's "leave your phone tethered to iTunes for a few hours until the update has been fully downloaded and applied".
I think Palm's biggest problem is the name: Pre. What the hell does it mean? It's just stupid. Pre-what? What will the next phone be called, Post? Pri?
I think you may understand if you pronounce it correctly - it is not Pre, rhymes with Key, but Pre rhymes with Ray - as is "Pray" or in other words let us Pray that our device stands a chance of succeeding.
And what would be the point exactly? It's not like webOS applications are web pages, webOS devs aren't in the situation iPhone devs for the first 12 months, they have access to the hardware through pretty normal APIs. It's just that these APIs are called via javascript (think Firefox, or OSX widgets) and the UI is written in (extended) HTML & CSS (once again, think Firefox's chrome, or widgets, or even Safari's developer tools which are written using HTML, CSS and JS)
What?
Uh no, this and that are completely unrelated. It mostly goes to show that the iPhone has a ~16 months headstart on apps (since the SDK was released to developers in March 2008) and a 24 months headstart on webapps.
That's a place where Palm dropped the ball (though they've never been big about third-party devs, which might lead to their downfall in the end): Mojo (the webOS SDK) still hasn't been publicly released and is still "early access" (you have to apply for it and you may or may not get accepted).
On the one hand, it took Apple a full year to release their SDK; on the other hand Apple's SDK is here right now (and was built using tools well known to OSX developers) so the landscape has changed and the lack of an SDK will probably hurt Palm soon.
edit: oh yeah, webOS/Pre is far superior to iPhoneOS/iPhone on the OS update side: it can update transparently over the air, downloading the updates in the background when the phone isn't busy, that's pretty damn sweet and much less intrusive than Apple's "leave your phone tethered to iTunes for a few hours until the update has been fully downloaded and applied".
Gotta disagree with you, at one time Palm WAS the PDA market. Their innovations such as getting handwriting to work let Palm succceed where Apple failed. The Treo line set a new standard for smart phones and again they owned the market for several years. The problem was they stopped the innovation no thanks to one terrible decision after another from their management team. More attenion was made to what the company's name was and the logo instead of the product. I'm glad to see they are back, this will keep the pressure on Apple to innovate. As consumers we win!
Yes, they are something of a cautionary tale: an example of generally bad management, of why Apple made the right call when they killed off the clones, and of why you should never listen to the tech press, or the general wisdom, when they tell you what you need to do to make your company successful. Licensing Palm OS and allowing clones was bad enough for Palm, but turning themselves into just another clone maker by spinning off PalmSource was a complete and utter disaster. A disaster that Apple, thankfully, avoided, if only narrowly.
Really, though, Pre may have certain not totally objective speed wins, but start-up, photo-upload email, and web-browsing are usually not mission critical repetitive tasks.
The testing pitting many different web pages seems more reliable.
And to echo posts above, it's about the ecosystem!
Okay I have had 4 Treos, and iPod touch and currently use Samsung WinMo Blackjack 2. (Way cheaper than iPhone with MediaNet plan). Anyway I tried the Pre for about 15 minutes in Sprint store and really I just couldn't figure it out. it seemed both slow, awkward and confusing to use. Very dependant on precise finger placement which was very difficult and that's from a person used to typing on the iPod Touch keyboard. It seemed to have none of the PalmOS intuitiveness. I felt like things I didn't want were just sliding all over the screen. The physical keyboard? Well the whole reason you use a vertically oriented phone is for one handed typing. I walk a mile to work everyday and often take care of all my morning email with one hand on my Blackjack. The Treo was just awkward. Too hard to hold and type with the keyboard extended, and the keyboard was way worse than the Treo 650 or Blackjack 2. On the plus side? The camera was okay.
Yes and did anyone bother to check out the sales breakdown?
They reported $3.42B in sales for 7.8M handsets sold. Broadly, that would imply a revenue of less than $450 per handset. That would be on the low side compared to Apple, no?
In any event, RIMM was down nearly 5% yesterday, after its earnings announcement.
No most people have no idea what those are, my point is that with the iPhone you get the advantage of using these thechnologies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
I wonder how many iPhone users even know what Objective-C or OpenGL really is. It doesn't strike me as something many people think about, possibly fewer than the people that know what an ARM chip is.
Comments
Wow 22nd post and you couldn't be further off, PALM used newtons technology for handwriting, they just paid apple to license it. So you make a statement, calling someone else out, yet you are clueless. KK you can probably leave now.
I can't find anything that says this is true. Some information I've found suggests that Palm might have licenced Grafitti to Apple after Apple's first try at handwriting recognition failed. This was before Palm started making their own devices. Palm did have to pay someone for it the technology, but that was Xerox, not Apple, because of a patent Xerox filed.
Palm was developing for other company's PDAs at that time, including Newton.
http://www.answers.com/topic/palmone-inc
In September 1994, Palm debuted its Graffiti handwriting recognition software. Until that time, users of personal digital assistants usually entered information by choosing selections on a tiny screen with a little plastic stylus. Adding any kind of practical keyboard would make the devices too large to carry in one's pocket. Apple's Newton already had a limited handwriting recognition capability, but Palm's Graffiti could be used for taking notes or sending e-mail. It boasted 100 percent accuracy and a speed to rival typing.
Palm offered the software for the Newton, Magic Cap, and other PDAs. Giant modem manufacturer U.S. Robotics, based in Skokie, Illinois, acquired Palm in September 1995 for $44 million. Palm was based in Los Altos, California.
I can't find anything that says this is true. Some information I've found suggests that Palm might have licenced Grafitti to Apple after Apple's handwriting recognition failed. This was before Palm started making their own devices. Palm did have to pay someone for it the technology, but that was Xerox, not Apple, because of a patent Xerox filed.
Palm was developing for other company's PDAs before Newton was introduced.
http://www.answers.com/topic/palmone-inc
This isn't entirely correct. I've got friends that owned Newtons, one of which whom still uses his.
I remember the Newton with the last OS as having quite complex recognition, and doing very well at it, certainly as good as Graffiti.
Even the very first OS had sophisticated recognition, even though you had to spend time training the device. Problem was, most people didn't want to take the time, and so it didn't work well. Like voice recognition. No trainie, no workie.
I also remember them TRYING to sell Graffiti to Apple, but didn't succeed.
It's really too bad about the Newton. The 2100 was a really fine machine, and far better than the Palm. Two strikes against it though.
Despite its much more sophisticated hardware and OS, it was too big and too expensive.
Still, when Jobs discontinued it, sales had gone well above where they had been, and people were thinking that it would be a success.
The OS was very sophisticated. All programs and info were kept in a "sea", where they could be recalled at once, and could be used to form new types of programs from snippets. You could get various little packages, and use them as if they were part of one program.
I can't imagine what it would look like today after so many years of development of the hardware and software. No one else would be close.
Too bad.
The Palm was a toy in comparison.
Being able to multitask with the wide variety of third party programs available for the pre is a major advantage.
I can't quite tell if you're being sarcastic.
I can?t tell either. While multitqask is an advantage referring to the Pre as having a wide varoety of third party programs is certainly sardonic.
This isn't entirely correct. I've got friends that owned Newtons, one of which whom still uses his.
I remember the Newton with the last OS as having quite complex recognition, and doing very well at it, certainly as good as Graffiti.
(snip)
I can't imagine what it would look like today after so many years of development of the hardware and software. No one else would be close.
Too bad.
The Palm was a toy in comparison.
Fair enough, I found and corrected some other mistakes in my post, but I'll leave it as it is now. It's hard finding good information on this.
My guess is that Pilot succeeded because it didn't try to do too much, and as such, could keep a small size and better price. Palm did what I needed it to do and the models I've owned actually fit in my pockets.
I don't recall if Palm was promoting it as an iPhone "killer" or not.
McNamee did but then Palm?s lawyers issued a retraction. He never said the term ?iPhone killer? but the sentiment was clear. His comments were hyperbolic enough that I wonder if it wasn?t completely staged to help draw more free media attention.
Step 1: Make outlandish statements about how your device is so much better than competitor.
Result 1: Generate free press.
Step 2: Issue retraction stating that what was said is necessary true.
Result 2: Generate free press.
Maybe he was just overzealous but it just seemed like a PT Barnum move.
iPhone OS 3.0s HTML 5 implementation now brings offline storage, audio background streaming is already there with Safari, so to have WebOS style "multitasking" on iPhone is to go just one step further for the most part. Which goes to show that the iPhone is more capable than the Prē, because then there are 50,000 apps besides Safari to explore and 3,000+ iPhone web apps already.
But seriously, Palm and Apple were once laying the ground for mobile information devices (aka PDAs) and are now at the forefront again for advancing the state of mobile phone and internet usage. And both really do not compete vs. each other but against the stalwarts of yesterday (Symbian) and wannabe 80% share holders (WiMo). And that is a good thing for everyone.
So kudos to Palm (which seeing where most of the engineers and their CEO came from, really now is "Apple II".. ;-)
just saying
Ciao, Alex
McNamee did but then Palm’s lawyers issued a retraction. He never said the term “iPhone killer’ but the sentiment was clear. His comments were hyperbolic enough that I wonder if it wasn’t completely staged to help draw more free media attention.
Step 1: Make outlandish statements about how your device is so much better than competitor.
Result 1: Generate free press.
Step 2: Issue retraction stating that what was said is necessary true.
Result 2: Generate free press.
Maybe he was just overzealous but it just seemed like a PT Barnum move.
Maybe getting that kind of attention works to an extent. Whether this kind of marketing works to sell a few more units or is just an ill-conceived plan based on faulty conventional wisdom, it keeps happening. I don't think anyone has said whether or not they've found it actually works.
It's getting annoying, but then, most marketing annoys me. Apple's marketing is often no exception.
I can’t tell either. While multitqask is an advantage referring to the Pre as having a wide varoety of third party programs is certainly sardonic.
]
multitqask ?
varoety ?
sardonic ?
= Wild friday night.
Or missing the keys on your new iphone.
Well, what I really wonder is when the first developer will port the WebOS GUI on top of iPhones WebKit engine. it would surely be possible to mimic it there pretty close.
And what would be the point exactly? It's not like webOS applications are web pages, webOS devs aren't in the situation iPhone devs for the first 12 months, they have access to the hardware through pretty normal APIs. It's just that these APIs are called via javascript (think Firefox, or OSX widgets) and the UI is written in (extended) HTML & CSS (once again, think Firefox's chrome, or widgets, or even Safari's developer tools which are written using HTML, CSS and JS)
so to have WebOS style "multitasking" on iPhone is to go just one step further for the most part.
What?
Which goes to show that the iPhone is more capable than the Prē, because then there are 50,000 apps besides Safari to explore and 3,000+ iPhone web apps already.
Uh no, this and that are completely unrelated. It mostly goes to show that the iPhone has a ~16 months headstart on apps (since the SDK was released to developers in March 2008) and a 24 months headstart on webapps.
That's a place where Palm dropped the ball (though they've never been big about third-party devs, which might lead to their downfall in the end): Mojo (the webOS SDK) still hasn't been publicly released and is still "early access" (you have to apply for it and you may or may not get accepted).
On the one hand, it took Apple a full year to release their SDK; on the other hand Apple's SDK is here right now (and was built using tools well known to OSX developers) so the landscape has changed and the lack of an SDK will probably hurt Palm soon.
edit: oh yeah, webOS/Pre is far superior to iPhoneOS/iPhone on the OS update side: it can update transparently over the air, downloading the updates in the background when the phone isn't busy, that's pretty damn sweet and much less intrusive than Apple's "leave your phone tethered to iTunes for a few hours until the update has been fully downloaded and applied".
I think Palm's biggest problem is the name: Pre. What the hell does it mean? It's just stupid. Pre-what? What will the next phone be called, Post? Pri?
I think you may understand if you pronounce it correctly - it is not Pre, rhymes with Key, but Pre rhymes with Ray - as is "Pray" or in other words let us Pray that our device stands a chance of succeeding.
The iPhone DOES multitask, it just doesn't allow third party programs to do so without Apple's approval, which is apparently very hard to get.
Uh, no, it does not truly Multi-Task. Can you run a twitter app, have your email app open and make a call at the same time? No.
Uh, no, it does not truly Multi-Task. Can you run a twitter app, have your email app open and make a call at the same time? No.
Can you listen to your music while surfing the web? I'm pretty sure you can, I'm doing it right now.
The iPhone does multitask (somewhat), but only some of Apple's apps.
And what would be the point exactly? It's not like webOS applications are web pages, webOS devs aren't in the situation iPhone devs for the first 12 months, they have access to the hardware through pretty normal APIs. It's just that these APIs are called via javascript (think Firefox, or OSX widgets) and the UI is written in (extended) HTML & CSS (once again, think Firefox's chrome, or widgets, or even Safari's developer tools which are written using HTML, CSS and JS)
What?
Uh no, this and that are completely unrelated. It mostly goes to show that the iPhone has a ~16 months headstart on apps (since the SDK was released to developers in March 2008) and a 24 months headstart on webapps.
That's a place where Palm dropped the ball (though they've never been big about third-party devs, which might lead to their downfall in the end): Mojo (the webOS SDK) still hasn't been publicly released and is still "early access" (you have to apply for it and you may or may not get accepted).
On the one hand, it took Apple a full year to release their SDK; on the other hand Apple's SDK is here right now (and was built using tools well known to OSX developers) so the landscape has changed and the lack of an SDK will probably hurt Palm soon.
edit: oh yeah, webOS/Pre is far superior to iPhoneOS/iPhone on the OS update side: it can update transparently over the air, downloading the updates in the background when the phone isn't busy, that's pretty damn sweet and much less intrusive than Apple's "leave your phone tethered to iTunes for a few hours until the update has been fully downloaded and applied".
The pre will sell fine.
The iphone will sell much more.
The pre will offer 2 for 1
or buy a pre and get a free zune.
The iphone still does not discount.
The pre will always be a 2nd tier phone.
A great 2nd tier phone.
Gotta disagree with you, at one time Palm WAS the PDA market. Their innovations such as getting handwriting to work let Palm succceed where Apple failed. The Treo line set a new standard for smart phones and again they owned the market for several years. The problem was they stopped the innovation no thanks to one terrible decision after another from their management team. More attenion was made to what the company's name was and the logo instead of the product. I'm glad to see they are back, this will keep the pressure on Apple to innovate. As consumers we win!
Yes, they are something of a cautionary tale: an example of generally bad management, of why Apple made the right call when they killed off the clones, and of why you should never listen to the tech press, or the general wisdom, when they tell you what you need to do to make your company successful. Licensing Palm OS and allowing clones was bad enough for Palm, but turning themselves into just another clone maker by spinning off PalmSource was a complete and utter disaster. A disaster that Apple, thankfully, avoided, if only narrowly.
It means "Pre-historic"
How 'bout "Pre-hensile"!
Really, though, Pre may have certain not totally objective speed wins, but start-up, photo-upload email, and web-browsing are usually not mission critical repetitive tasks.
The testing pitting many different web pages seems more reliable.
And to echo posts above, it's about the ecosystem!
Sadly this is true.
No, happily.
I assumed it was an acronym.
pretty reasonable effort
product of recent employes
predictable release ennui
...
Great post!
Yes and did anyone bother to check out the sales breakdown?
They reported $3.42B in sales for 7.8M handsets sold. Broadly, that would imply a revenue of less than $450 per handset. That would be on the low side compared to Apple, no?
In any event, RIMM was down nearly 5% yesterday, after its earnings announcement.
I wonder how many iPhone users even know what Objective-C or OpenGL really is. It doesn't strike me as something many people think about, possibly fewer than the people that know what an ARM chip is.