PALM is dead
Satan
undeniable.
The sole remaining question is whether or not an unnamed major company will
elect to purchase Palm this summer.
Sorry to see you go, Carl.
PALMS
Has Palm Lost Its Grip?
Its ubiquitous gadget has become a pop icon. But that may not be enough to
pull Palm through its slump.
FORTUNE
Monday, May 28, 2001
By John Simons
I've seen the best minds of my generation in thrall to their Palm
Pilots--Prada pump-shod hipsters standing on Greenwich Village corners,
searching silvery Palms for guidance on all-night tapas bars; executives
achieving order amid the chaos of the morning A train, sitting jackknifed
over green-hued screens, scribbling God knows what; coffeeshop poets aiming
Palms at one another, gunslinger style, swapping verses across infrared
beams.
Heck, if Allen Ginsberg were alive today, he might have written "Howl" on a
Palm. More than a mere personal organizer, the Palm in five short years has
become a pop icon. At once embodying late-'90s techno-fetishism, a
work-is-play ethos, and the public's unceasing quest for personal
improvement, Palm Inc.'s sleek, high-end version, the $299 Palm V, is
destined for a place in the Smithsonian. It took just 18 months for the
original Palm Pilot to sell one million units, thereby surpassing the IBM
personal computer, the Sony Walkman, the color television, and the cell
phone in rate of consumer acceptance. Some 13 million people now own a
Palm-branded device.
Palm Inc.'s debut on the financial market was no less spectacular. When the
company went public, on March 2 of last year, shares initially priced at $38
rose as high as $165 before settling in at $95. By day's end Palm had a
market value of $53.4 billion, nearly double the valuation of the $28
billion company that had bought it in 1997 and had now spun it off:
network-equipment manufacturer 3Com. Investors saw nothing but promise. The
devices and the minimalist software that powered them represented a new kind
of computing built on simplicity, an alternative to the aggravating
complexity of Microsoft's Windows. The Palm approach didn't concern itself
with chip processing speed and hard-drive capacity. No hourglasses while
programs loaded. No crashes. The Palm just made life easier. A
$1-billion-a-year company was born.
It's ironic that a company known for helping people plan and schedule could
be so ham-handed in managing its own affairs, but such is the case with
Palm. Business realities apply even when your product is a pop icon. Bungled
product launches, increasing competition, and a souring economy have all
conspired to loosen Palm's grip on the market it helped shape. And the
company's long-term obstacles are daunting. Its closest rival, Handspring,
has become more innovative than Palm. Its CEO has yet to prove himself,
after 18 months on the job. Its operating system is running out of steam.
And Microsoft wants its market.
The most immediate concern for Palm is its vanishing growth. Last fall a
slowdown seemed implausible, especially when Palm's Christmas season sales
jumped 102% over the previous year's. But the economic slump hit hard,
making January and February cruel months on the sales floor. The sudden dip
caught executives flat-footed. "The first few weeks, I would keep saying,
'Two data points don't make a trend, one month doesn't constitute a trend,'
" says Palm marketing chief Satjiv Chahil. "After five, six weeks, I'm
going, 'Yikes, people are holding on to their wallets a little harder.' "
Palm managed to come out of the three-month period ended in March with
revenues of $471 million, up 73% over the previous year's. But on March 27,
Palm was forced to caution that revenues for the current quarter would be
flat compared with those of the same period last year, and that the company
would record an operating loss of about $80 million. Shares of the stock
fell 48% on the announcement, to $7.44. The price has hovered near $10 since
early April. "We missed the turn," admits chief financial officer Judy
Bruner.
Palm's response only made matters worse. To soften up consumers, Palm began
offering rebates and discounts. But in March the company hurt itself by
announcing plans to have two new high-end units in stores by early May--the
m500, a cousin to the famous Palm V, and the m505, a similar device with a
color screen. Sales of the Palm V immediately fell. Unfortunately for Palm,
by mid-May the new models were only beginning to trickle into stores. As a
result, consumer purchases shifted to low-end units; Palm offers everything
from the entry-level m100, which retails for about $150, to the $399
wireless Web-enabled Palm VIIx. The price of the company's average sale has
dropped from $260 in May 2000 to about $197 this March.
Palm's otherworldly profit margins have shrunk too, from 39% a year ago to
32% today. The company recently warned that it expects margins to shrink to
25% this summer. While those figures aren't terrible, some industry watchers
see PC-like margins in Palm's future--and for PCs, 10% to 12% is considered
a windfall. "Why should a Palm device be any different from the PC?" says
Salomon Smith Barney financial analyst Richard Gardner. "We can't help but
think that margins are going to continue to slide."
Like other high-tech companies today, Palm is also choking on inventory.
Last year the company struggled to meet demand for its gadgets. In November
executives decided to solve that problem by signing a handful of long-term
deals that guaranteed a steady supply of components. The contracts locked
Palm into high purchase volumes that it doesn't necessarily need now.
Despite another round of price cuts, Palm's inventory pileup could surpass
$300 million by the end of June, which will hurt sales of new products and
force the company to burn through roughly half of its available cash this
quarter. Palm may also have to take a write-off.
Palm will have a tough time correcting those near-term missteps, in part
because its role in the marketplace has changed from lead innovator to
also-ran. In 1998, fed up with 3Com's limited vision for the handheld maker,
Palm founders Jeff Hawkins and Donna Dubinsky resigned. Hawkins had been
designing handheld computers since the late 1980s and was the brains behind
the original Palm Pilot, the Palm V, and the wireless Palm VII. Since
Hawkins' departure, Palm has yet to release a single device that hadn't been
conceived by its former CEO. Even the m500 and the m505 are mere revisions
of the Palm V. Within weeks of exiting Palm, Hawkins and Dubinsky founded
Handspring. The company introduced its flagship Visor 14 months later and
won a 21% market share in little more than a year, helping knock Palm's
share down from 83% to 63%.
Handspring leapt forward with new ideas as well. The Visor carries an
expansion slot to which users can attach gadgets that turn the tiny computer
into an MP3 player, a camera, or even a cell phone. Some 50 third-party
attachments now exist for the device. Along with other makers of handhelds,
Palm has added an expansion slot to its newest models, but few attachments
are available yet.
The Visor's success isn't an unalloyed loss for Palm. Handspring licenses
the Palm operating system, so Palm makes about $9 in royalties on every
Visor sold. But it's hard to see how Palm will replace the revenue it's
losing from Handspring's cannibalization of the market. Licenses to
Handspring and other handheld makers account for only about 2% of Palm's
overall revenues.
With Hawkins and Dubinsky long gone, the man in charge at Palm is CEO Carl
Yankowski, who so far seems to be relying on philosophy as much as on
strategy. There's a mantra often repeated around the Palm offices: "the Zen
of Palm." The phrase is as hard to define as the meaning of life, but Palm
staffers say it is a guiding principle for the company's only-the-essentials
approach to products.
No one personifies the Zen of Palm more than Yankowski, who took over the
company in December 1999. Yankowski arrived after a brief stint as CEO of
Reebok Unlimited but is best known for driving Sony Electronics into new
markets, including personal computers, DVD players, and digital imaging,
with mixed results. Yankowski is a tall, husky man with a pilot's license
and seven patents to his name. He'd be imposing if not for his calm,
deliberate manner, which is reflected in his unworried attitude toward
business.
Yankowski's long-term objective is to keep Palm at the center of what he
calls the Palm economy, based largely on the ubiquity of the Palm operating
system. He is quick to point out that the system resides on more than 90% of
handhelds sold. "Handspring is a worthy competitor, and we try to respond to
them," says Yankowski. "We are delighted to have them as a licensee inside
the Palm economy rather than working exclusively with Microsoft." As the
Palm economy grows, Yankowski argues, so grows Palm. Hence he claims not to
fret about Handspring's market surge.
But Palm's relationship with its biggest licensee is a tenuous one. Palm's
engineers are working on Palm 5.0, a major revision of the operating system.
Palm 5.0 will run more powerful chip sets, but it will also require device
makers to revamp their hardware around it. Handspring recently signed a
contract to use the Palm OS for another eight years, but the deal doesn't
bar it from contracting with makers of other operating systems, like Linux
and Microsoft's PocketPC. Says Handspring co-founder Dubinsky: "We are happy
with the Palm OS. At the same time, we are not exclusive. If we felt there
was a substantial functionality problem or if there was something we
couldn't do that we wanted to do with it ... we never say never."
Microsoft would be only too eager to enlarge its minuscule footprint in the
handheld-device market. Palm rivals Compaq, Hewlett-Packard, and Casio, all
of which make devices powered by Microsoft's comparatively bloated operating
system, garner just 8% of handheld sales. Says Microsoft Mobility director
Phil Holden of his company's initial forays into handheld software: "We
mucked it up royally." He now argues that Microsoft is on the right track.
Holden's shop has the second-largest research and development budget on the
Redmond, Wash., campus. That's $300 million--just for R&D. (The top-funded
project is the X-box, Microsoft's answer to Sega and Nintendo.) The crowning
glory of this effort is the Stinger, a combination cell phone and personal
organizer. Mitsubishi and Samsung already manufacture the device, and
wireless carriers Vodafone in Europe and VoiceStream in the U.S. have
committed to rolling out the Stinger this year.
Palm has yet to parry Microsoft's thrust into the hybrid-device market.
Japanese electronics maker Kyocera has released a wireless phone that has a
large screen and uses the Palm operating system. (See both Alsop on Infotech
and Personal Technology for differing views on the Kyocera phone.) But the
Kyocera fuses two operating systems in its chip set: one that runs the
organizer and another that runs the cell-phone functions. The Stinger has
one system. Holden boasts, "I don't see Palm as a competitor in a year's
time. My main competition going forward is Handspring and Nokia."
So why hasn't Palm, the market leader, responded with its own combo unit?
Yankowski and others argue that their priority isn't rushing to market but
providing simple, elegant solutions. "You expect that the phonemakers would
be able to do [cell-phone/personal organizer] mating first. We have our own
products in the hopper," Yankowski says. Still, he admits that Palm has been
behind the curve. "The product-development pool was pretty empty when I
inherited this business," he allows. "The company was focused on the IPO and
getting the company spun off. 3Com obviously had its own issues, and I don't
think they were heavily investing in this particular business."
For now, however, Yankowski must focus on doing the kinds of things that
CEOs at the helm of troubled companies must do--cutting costs and trying to
steer the company into new markets. In recent weeks he has trimmed Palm's
work force by 15%, or 300 jobs, and halted plans to build a new
multimillion-dollar corporate headquarters in San Jose. He also divided the
company into new business units to help it win new customers.
Yankowski's greatest hopes are for the corporate market. Since the whole
cult-of-Palm movement was largely driven by individuals who wanted to be
more efficient, Yankowski is betting that corporations eager to pinch
pennies might now see the Palm as an alternative to laptops and start buying
it in mass quantities. "I just sold about 15,000 Palms to Sears for their
retail sales force," he brags. Schools are another market that Palm will
attempt to tap. And Palm engineers are working with Visa on technology that
will let consumers use their Palms to make electronic payments at retail
stores.
Palm will not be alone in pursuing these markets, so Yankowski's insistence
that he is finding his job easier than it was a year ago has a wistful ring
to it. "Adversity tends to focus people more on success," he says, with a
hint of Zen-like reasoning. That may be true. But iconic status can only
help for so long. If Palm can no longer create objects of devotion, people
will look elsewhere. Then the real adversity will begin.
use...@sotobori.com
what the Palm apologists are so fearful to admit.
Craig Froehle
>
> This pretty much sums up everything wrong with Palm. The facts are
> undeniable.
> The sole remaining question is whether or not an unnamed major company will
> elect to purchase Palm this summer.
If prostitution is the world's oldest profession, predicting the demise
of an industry leader must be the world's oldest hobby. Some
predictions are right, some are wrong, but like all free opinions,
they're worth about what you pay for them. Just my $0.02.
- Craig
Ben Steeves
<use...@sotobori.com> wrote:
>Amazing how all of the articles are coming out now affirming
>what the Palm apologists are so fearful to admit.
Last time I heard a death knell like this, it was for Apple.
Who cares? A Palm is a Handspring is a Sony is a Handera.......
and my Palm is keeping me going just fine, thank you very much. All I need the
company for is replacement parts, and maybe not even that. Hm. Think I might
stockpile a few units. :)
Palm is dead! Long live the PDA!
Ben
>
>In comp.sys.palmtops.pilot Satan <Sa...@palm.as> wrote:
>> This pretty much sums up everything wrong with Palm. The facts are
>> undeniable.
>> The sole remaining question is whether or not an unnamed major company will
>> elect to purchase Palm this summer.
>
>> Sorry to see you go, Carl.
>
>
>
>> PALMS
>> Has Palm Lost Its Grip?
>> Its ubiquitous gadget has become a pop icon. But that may not be enough to
>> pull Palm through its slump.
>> FORTUNE
>> Monday, May 28, 2001
>> By John Simons
--
Ben Steeves; -- ben_s...@yahoo.com -- ICQ: 15105093
PLEASE REMOVE ANY ANTI-SPAM MEASURES FROM YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS
BEFORE YOU E-MAIL ME! BOUNCED REPLIES WILL NOT BE FORWARDED!
"Power corrupts. Absolute power is kind of neat."
-- Anonymous
eMeL
There must be many physicians there - ask for Prozac or something similar.
Michael
Satan <Sa...@palm.as> wrote in message
news:%%bN6.14575$Az.13...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Rogue
Ellison might wish). Several opinions aren't much better than one opinion,
even if they're pundits (such as Dale Coffing, Chris De Herrera, John
Simmons, or others). Pretty much the only thing that defines an industry is
the market.
With so many new devices coming out, and all Palm licensees, we'll just see
how Palm does. :) Give it a summer, then repost the "Palm is dead..."
article.
<use...@sotobori.com> wrote in message
news:6bcN6.7788$Up.2...@sea-read.news.verio.net...
Stephen Gilman
> In comp.sys.palmtops.pilot Ben Steeves <b...@localhost.localdomain> wrote:
>
> | Who cares?
>
>
> What would happen if MS bought the OS at a bankruptcy sale? Might you
> care then?
What if Apple bought the OS at a bankruptcy sale?
--
"Philosophy is to the real world as masturbation is to sex." - Karl Marx
"Moral indignation is jealousy with a halo." - H. G. Wells
"In America - as elsewhere - free speech is confined to the dead."
- Mark Twain
Satan
because Bill Gates decided a few years ago to keep them afloat (so he could
sell more programs to Apple users). Does history repeat? You'll soon see.
There isn't any need for you to start stockpiling Palms along with those
cans of green beans I hear you have in your bunker. Palm devices have a big
enough penetration that they will be around for at least 5 more years.
"Ben Steeves" <b...@localhost.localdomain> wrote in message
news:slrn9gal9...@localhost.localdomain...
> On Fri, 18 May 2001 16:35:14 GMT, use...@sotobori.com
Toby Guidry
>On Fri, 18 May 2001 16:35:14 GMT, use...@sotobori.com
> <use...@sotobori.com> wrote:
>>Amazing how all of the articles are coming out now affirming
>>what the Palm apologists are so fearful to admit.
>
So, does this mean that Palm is going to try to woo Hawkins back and
receive a sizeable investment from Redmond? ;)
Toby
--
/ "It is by isomerized alpha acids alone that I set my mind at ease ...
It is by the hops of East Kent that thoughts acquire peace ... The mouth
develops puckering, The puckering becomes a warning ... It is by
isomerized alpha acids alone that I set my mind at ease." - Ancient
brewtat mantra
Julio M. Davila
Windows Powered" from each device.
...just kidding. I hope that Palm recovers and that they continue doing
business.
:)
<eskw...@SPAMBLOCK.shore.net> wrote in message
news:EVcN6.1024$du2....@news.shore.net...
> In comp.sys.palmtops.pilot Ben Steeves <b...@localhost.localdomain> wrote:
>
> | Who cares?
>
>
> What would happen if MS bought the OS at a bankruptcy sale? Might you
> care then?
>
>
> --
> =========================================================
> --------...@shore.net------------
> =========================================================
use...@sotobori.com
> <use...@sotobori.com> wrote:
>>Amazing how all of the articles are coming out now affirming
>>what the Palm apologists are so fearful to admit.
> Last time I heard a death knell like this, it was for Apple.
Very appropriate comparison because both companies suffer from
the same problem. Weakening marketshare, extremely loyal
following, great products, pathetic marketing, fixation on
high unit profit margin, lack of killer app.
Satan
"Toby Guidry" <stran...@REMOVEmindspring.com> wrote in message
news:Xns90A5817BED...@209.205.129.7...
> Thus spake Ben Steeves in <slrn9gal9...@localhost.localdomain>:
use...@sotobori.com
> because Bill Gates decided a few years ago to keep them afloat (so he could
> sell more programs to Apple users). Does history repeat? You'll soon see.
I agree that Bill Gates has most to do with Apple still being around
but that stubborn, loyal cult following still has pretty deep pockets
and is always willing to shell out twice what they should for repackaged
products and as long as they are still around, Apple will survive in one
form or another.
> There isn't any need for you to start stockpiling Palms along with those
> cans of green beans I hear you have in your bunker. Palm devices have a big
> enough penetration that they will be around for at least 5 more years.
I think they will be around about as long as there is not a viable
alternative to motivate people to make a switch. Until that happens,
they will be around, albeit in a crippled mode.
use...@sotobori.com
> In comp.sys.palmtops.pilot Ben Steeves <b...@localhost.localdomain> wrote:
> What would happen if MS bought the OS at a bankruptcy sale? Might you
> care then?
The only reason M$ would buy them is to shut them down.
Ben Steeves
<eskw...@SPAMBLOCK.shore.net> wrote:
>In comp.sys.palmtops.pilot Ben Steeves <b...@localhost.localdomain> wrote:
>
>| Who cares?
>
>
>What would happen if MS bought the OS at a bankruptcy sale? Might you
>care then?
Why? The device I have *RIGHT NOW* is all the PDA I need. If Microsoft starts
messing with it, I just don't buy any more. Simple. Hell, I let MS meddle
with my desktop OS on a yearly basis...
And for those of you who've angrily been e-mailing me telling me I'm "missing
the big picture", I assure you, I'm not. I just don't care about it.
Bruce
"Satan" <Sa...@palm.as> wrote in message
news:%%bN6.14575$Az.13...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> This pretty much sums up everything wrong with Palm. The facts are
> undeniable.
>
Plausible, I suppose. I don't expect Palm to die, though; rather become 33%
of their current size.
If what a company is about is defined through their employess then the true
PALM is really over at Handspring anyway. So Palm, Inc. going "bye" is no
big deal.
Besides, I just left the world of WinCE. If the PalmOS evaporates
(unlikely, even in bankruptcy) then maybe I will see whether ROM, CPUs, and
batteries have gotten powerful enough to run Linux. Though I am skeptical
of the oomph on this bad boy: http://www.agendacomputing.com/
You know, my needs will be covered by a lot of differnt folks within twelve
months:
I want small form factor
I want an appointment book/anniversary reminder
I want a to-do list
I want wireless e-mail (real time preferred)
I want to see the display inside a building and outside a building
Graffiti looks like the way to go, would prefer that
I want the battery to support the device 12 hours, display on for maybe 4 of
the twelve
I don't want my data to disappear when power is too low to support the
display
-BruceW
Ben Steeves
> (eskw...@SPAMBLOCK.shore.net) writes:
>> In comp.sys.palmtops.pilot Ben Steeves <b...@localhost.localdomain> wrote:
>>
>> | Who cares?
>>
>>
>> What would happen if MS bought the OS at a bankruptcy sale? Might you
>> care then?
>
>
>What if Apple bought the OS at a bankruptcy sale?
Ooh! Now *there's* an idea!
Seriously though, I think we're calling the race too soon (although I know you
Americans are good at that :). Palm is going through a slump, and they got
seriously Osborned on the m50x's, but they can still pull through. Sure, they
might not have their nice 30% profit margins and hyperinflated stock prices,
but the company isn't in intensive care quite yet.
And even if they are, it might be a good thing for PDA technology. The Zen of
Palm shows the way, but prophets don't become prophets by living to a ripe
old age :)
Woo, politics, finances, and religion all in one post. I think I need a
vacation (longer than the last one!).
Bruce
<use...@sotobori.com> wrote in message
news:KgdN6.7798$Up.2...@sea-read.news.verio.net...
>
> Very appropriate comparison because both companies suffer from
> the same problem. Weakening marketshare, extremely loyal
> following, great products, pathetic marketing, fixation on
> high unit profit margin, lack of killer app.
>
Well, if you want to be generic then "spreadsheets" as in any spreadsheet
app was the original "killer app" for the PC (whether made by IBM, Apple or
someone else). So being generic again (not mentioning a specific product
combination) Palm, Agenda Computing, Handspring, and Microsoft vendors ALL
know what the current "killer app" is at the moment for the PDA market -
wireless communications. Especially for real-time messaging (replaces the
pager) and real-time email.
You can sell to the individual, and the enterprise, if you can support
secure wireless communications.
The next step required will be real-time *major secure* email with built-in
viewing support for attachments, so the enterprise can communicate with its
far-flung employees (look at this budget sheet please, look at this project
proposal).
Don't make all your employees lug around an expensive laptop. Seems pretty
obvious.
Maybe you are saying Palm Net does not quite cut it? Perhaps, I would not
know.
-BruceW
Nick Vargish
Sorry, the money that Bill "gave" Apple was pretty much a court-
mandated settlement. Microsoft just found a way to put marketing
spin on the payout.
"Satan" <Sa...@palm.as> writes:
> Perhaps you don't realize that the only reason Apple is still around is
> because Bill Gates decided a few years ago to keep them afloat (so he could
> sell more programs to Apple users). Does history repeat? You'll soon see.
--
#include<stdio.h> /* SigMask 0.3 (sig.c) 19990429 PUBLIC DOMAIN "Compile Me" */
int main(c,v)char *v;{return !c?putchar(*v-1)&&main(0,v+ /* Tweaks welcomed. */
1):main(0,"Ojdl!Wbshjti!=obwAqbusjpu/ofu?\v\1");} /* build: cc -o sig sig.c */
Toby Guidry
>
>Sorry, the money that Bill "gave" Apple was pretty much a court-
>mandated settlement. Microsoft just found a way to put marketing
>spin on the payout.
Strange that the court ordered Steve Jobs to go along with this
'marketing spin', isn't it? One would think that he'd have been crowing
like a rooster at sunrise if your version were so, rather than trying to
fend back the boos of the audience so he could explain.
Toby
--
NP: _Best of King's X_ - King's X / "Any sufficiently advanced
technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C. Clarke (3rd
Law)
Nick Vargish
Err, I think Apple went along with the Microsoft spin because it meant
they would get their money, rather than another long dance through the
appeals process. Plus, they really did need the cash, I won't argue
about _that_. :^)
Nick
stran...@REMOVEmindspring.com (Toby Guidry) writes:
--
Major West
"Satan" <Sa...@palm.as> wrote in message
news:o9dN6.14769$Az.13...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
wayne richardson
These aren't far-out needs. They're here today.
-wayne
David Ness
>
>
> Strange that the court ordered Steve Jobs to go along with this
> 'marketing spin', isn't it? One would think that he'd have been crowing
> like a rooster at sunrise if your version were so, rather than trying to
> fend back the boos of the audience so he could explain.
>
Not so strange if you just write, as any good lawyer would, a little clause in the
settlement contract that says `Keep your mouth shut and Smile if you ever want a nickle
of your money'.
It tends to make `crowing like a rooster' an act that would only be committed by a fool,
and Jobs is---at least in this regard---no fool.
Bruce
"wayne richardson" <w...@vnet.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:3B058AF9...@vnet.ibm.com...
>
> These aren't far-out needs. They're here today.
>
> -wayne
>
Yup. Simple needs.
I think I will be 100% there when Omnisky comes out for the m505 in the next
few months. I have an m505 and am enjoying it right now.
My point was, if Palm Inc. croaks I may have to look around for an m505
replacement when my device goes t*ts up, but I don't expect that to be a big
problem - for me. Maybe someone else will be crying in their beer, but I
will do okay. :)
-BruceW
--
email:
c o y o t e a t
r i c o c h e t d o t n e t
Gene
I don't think they have the cash, but imagine a resurrected Newton OS in a
Palm Form Factor..
Regardless on how you feel about Apple, the make the coolest hardware by
far.
iPALM?
"Satan" <Sa...@palm.as> wrote in message
news:%%bN6.14575$Az.13...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Steve Lovell
Eric Wright
"Major West" <Com...@Jupiter2.com> wrote in message
news:9e3vln$h...@dispatch.concentric.net...
> Well since you think Palm is dead why don't you stop posting your crap
here.
>
LOL!
Eric Wright
----- Original Message -----
From: <eskw...@SPAMBLOCK.shore.net>
Newsgroups:
alt.comp.sys.palmtops.pilot,comp.sys.palmtops.pilot,comp.sys.palmtops
Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2001 2:24 AM
Subject: Re: PALM is dead
> In comp.sys.palmtops.pilot Ben Steeves <b...@localhost.localdomain> wrote:
>
> | Who cares?
>
>
> What would happen if MS bought the OS at a bankruptcy sale? Might you
> care then?
>
>
> --
> =========================================================
> --------...@shore.net------------
> =========================================================
Ben Steeves
<DONTbeSPAMMIN...@ricochet.net> wrote:
>
>My point was, if Palm Inc. croaks I may have to look around for an m505
>replacement when my device goes t*ts up, but I don't expect that to be a big
>problem - for me. Maybe someone else will be crying in their beer, but I
>will do okay. :)
I'm with your Bruce. If my Newton were the size of my m505, with as good a
screen, I'd still be using it, and Apple hasn't given Newton users any support
in years. Heck, there are lots of people (one in my own office) who still use
their Newtons, because it does everything they want.
PS: I still want to see the Newton Assistant on my Palm.
Ben Steeves
>Then it would be time to switch to Agenda's PDA.
I don't think so. The Agenda is the polar opposite of the Palm -- complexity
over simplicity. It seems to me that the simpler and more elegant the PDA OS,
the better I've liked it (except for the REX, which is simple but not elegant).
I'd prefer not to have a PDA with /etc startup scripts and a /dev directory to
worry about :)
Eric Wright
consumers. From what I hear, the VR3 units pretty much work like the Palm
in everyday typical PDA usage....very simplistic when it comes to keeping
track of your appointments, addresses, and other data.
I'm thinking that the mainstream consumer who will use an Agenda VR3 will
not have to know what a script is, or a /dev directory, if all he's going to
do is store info (though, for those geeks who'd want to tool with it, they
have that option).
"Ben Steeves" <b...@localhost.localdomain> wrote in message
news:slrn9gcqi...@localhost.localdomain...
S London
Perhaps you can suggest a "hack" that will fix the company as well as your
fix for the 505's screen?
In article <%%bN6.14575$Az.13...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
Bruce
"Eric Wright" <black...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9e60hs$sdb$1...@newsflood.tokyo.att.ne.jp...
> Agenda isn't targetting the linux geeks. They are targetting mainstream
> consumers. From what I hear, the VR3 units pretty much work like the Palm
> in everyday typical PDA usage....very simplistic when it comes to keeping
> track of your appointments, addresses, and other data.
>
> I'm thinking that the mainstream consumer who will use an Agenda VR3 will
> not have to know what a script is, or a /dev directory, if all he's going
to
> do is store info (though, for those geeks who'd want to tool with it, they
> have that option).
>
I agree with you.
However sometimes a device's simple mode of operation gets lost in all the
techno-geek functionality spewed out by the experts. In other words, the
customer runs away before they learn there *is* a "simple mode" you can
remain in all the time.
-BruceW
Brian Ascot
Paul Reading
bas...@hotmail.com wrote on 20/5/01 3:03 am:
> jealous !
>
>
>
>
Palm have made a major mistake in Licensing their OS to other hardware
manufacturers. They have now lost control of the price of there product.
Craig Froehle
> Palm have made a major mistake in Licensing their OS to other hardware
> manufacturers. They have now lost control of the price of there product.
Ha ha ha ha ha [wipes tears from eyes] Thanks, I needed that.
- Craig
Paul Reading
cr...@memoware.com wrote on 20/5/01 2:07 pm:
Palm cannot control the price of hardware, they have competition. Apple has
survived by stopping third party manufacturers.
Craig Froehle
>
> cr...@memoware.com wrote on 20/5/01 2:07 pm:
>
> > Paul Reading wrote:
> >> Palm have made a major mistake in Licensing their OS to other hardware
> >> manufacturers. They have now lost control of the price of there product.
> >
> > Ha ha ha ha ha [wipes tears from eyes] Thanks, I needed that.
>
> survived by stopping third party manufacturers.
Ok, since you obviously believe what you're saying, I'll address how it
lacks validity.
In the history of computing technologies, no company that has attempted
to maintain control of both the hardware and the software has held onto
a market leader position. Let's consider three examples:
* Tandy - tried unsuccessfully to do this with PCs
* IBM - tried unsuccessfully to do this with mainframes
* Apple - sorry, Mac fans, but you have to admit they're not the
heavyweight in PCs or PDAs they once were (much to my own chagrin)
Palm's current revenues are heavily skewed towards selling devices --
hardware. Their business model hopes to eventually make that less of a
contribution percentage-wise, with most revenue coming from (a)
licensing the OS, (b) software, and (c) services.
As a counter-example, does Microsoft actually manufacture computers?
No. Does their OS licensing business bring them in huge revenues?
Yes. They have no intention on controlling the hardware, which is a
lower margin business, since they know that they don't have to. Right
now, Palm has to make units since there isn't a critical mass of 3rd
party hardware manufacturers. Once there is, however, they could become
just an OS company if they wanted to (I don't think that'll ever happen
since they've already developed some expertise at design, manufacturing,
and managing the supply chain and retail outlets).
Finally, licensing the OS to 3rd party hardware developers benefits
everyone. It benefits Palm by ensuring that these companies don't (or
are less likely to) develop a WindowsCE device instead. It benefits us
consumers by accelerating innovation beyond what just a single company
might be able to do. It benefits software developers by giving them a
larger potential customer base. It benefits the licensees since they
now don't have to develop their own OS. The only group it doesn't
benefit is Palm's competitors.
Licensing is smart, licensing is good, licensing is the only way Palm
has a chance at sustaining the lead it created in the late 90's.
- Craig
Alan Anderson
> > Apple has survived by stopping third party manufacturers.
>
> Well, survived maybe, but succeeded? All I ever hear is Apple's woes and
> infinitely small marketshare.
It's mostly semi-clueless pundits who trumpet every little bit of
imperfect news from Apple as "woes". If Dell, Compaq, Gateway, and Micron
got similar press, you'd have heard predictions of their demise for years
as well.
I don't think being one of the top ten computer manufacturers qualifies
Apple as having "infinitely small" market share. There's something
interesting skewing the sales numbers so that they don't really reflect
the installed base -- Apple computers tend to have a useful life of at
least twice that of a typical system running Windows. A sizeable fraction
of the Windows PCs sold are used to replace systems being retired. A
sizeable fraction of Macintoshes sold are used to replace systems being
redeployed.
And Apple's a *big* player in the laptop arena.
> Palm is doing rather well and has the lion's share of the market in PDAs.
Note: Lions don't share. The phrase "lion's share" is really supposed to
be used when one entity gets *all* of something, or at least as much as
can be handled. It's intended as an ironic phrase. Palm has nowhere near
the market control it would need to merit that description.
Peter da Silva
Satan <Sa...@palm.as> wrote:
>This pretty much sums up everything wrong with Palm. The facts are
>undeniable.
Did you have permission to repost this copyrighted story? You didn't even
give us a URL.
--
Rev. Peter da Silva, ULC. WWFD?
"Capitalism works primarily because most of the ways that a company can be scum
end up being extremely bad for business when there's working competition." -rra
Ben Steeves
>In article <%%bN6.14575$Az.13...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
>Satan <Sa...@palm.as> wrote:
>>This pretty much sums up everything wrong with Palm. The facts are
>>undeniable.
>
>Did you have permission to repost this copyrighted story? You didn't even
>give us a URL.
This is the one, isn't it?
http://www.fortune.com/indexw.jhtml?channel=artcol.jhtml&doc_id=202515
GWM
wrote:
>As a counter-example, does Microsoft actually manufacture computers?
>No. Does their OS licensing business bring them in huge revenues?
>Yes.
<snip>
Microsoft did not start out as a hardware company. What Palm does NOT
have is a business model based on software sales and licenses alone.
-G
Craig Froehle
> Microsoft did not start out as a hardware company. What Palm does NOT
> have is a business model based on software sales and licenses alone.
Nor did IBM start out as a services company, but today over half its
revenue comes from technology-related services. Companies can change --
managing that change takes a lot of skill and a little bit of luck, and
CEOs who do it well deserve their fat paychecks, IMHO. Whether Palm can
effect a change from a device manufacturer to a services and software
firm remains to be seen, but I, for one, am rooting for them.
- Craig
Ian G Batten
Depends on if Palm think they are a hardware company that licenses a bit
of software on the side, or a software company that's making hardware to
leverage their operating system into a market short of platforms. Apple
tends to suggest the former model is weak, as their half-hearted thrusts
into and retreats from either clone or Intel platform AppleOS markets
show. Microsoft is conclusive proof that the latter model is pretty
sound --- Microsoft have branded odds and ends of hardware like
soundcards, CD drives and mice as they have wanted to deliver
functionality for which the hardware is not yet commodity. I accept
this isn't like shipping platforms, but the leap isn't that large
conceptually.
The ``are we a hardware company or a software company?'' problem also
covers Sun and Cisco, amongst others.
ian
--
PGP: http://www.batten.eu.org/~igb/pgpsignatures/20010520/224809.2703.asc
Kevin
I agree. I suspect the following scenario happened:
Palm, as a division of 3Com, was sailing along beautifully, with
extremely popular products, 80% of the handheld market share and
tremendous profit margins.
The company was directed by Jeff Hawkins and Donna Dubinsky, the pair
who had created the palm revolution. At some point, for unknown
reasons, Jeff and Donna decided to break from Palm/3Com and start their
own business making their own palm units. But, to be successful, they
needed the PalmOS they'd originally designed.
As already mentioned, they had sales dominance and handsome
profitability marketing their wildly popular handhelds. But, the
company, led by Jeff and Donna (who had decided to leave and start their
own company), decided to significantly change what was working so
perfectly. The company decided they'd focus on letting other companies
cut into their product market share (with about $75-$150 profit per
unit) by helping them and licensing them the PalmOS for just $9 per unit
sold.
Once this stategic change was implemented, Jeff and Donna unexpectedly
announce they're leaving Palm. Just two weeks later they publicly
announce they will be marketing a new handheld product-line utilizing
the PalmOS.
Taking advantage of the puzzling stategic change at the previously
hugely successful Palm operation (that they implemented in the year
before leaving), they price their units below Palm's and add a new
proprietary expansion technology. They, in roughly their first year, go
on to capure roughly 20% of the product marketplace, lowering Palm's
share from a dominating 80% to 60%.
Palm, still following Jeff and Donna's change in focus, continue on,
exchanging an approximate average profit of $115 per unit sold for about
$9 per unit sold. Or, a net revenue loss of about $106 on one-fourth of
their previous market.
Meanwhile, Jeff and Donna, go on to net about $106 per unit sold of
one-fourth of what had been Palm's solid marketshare.
Although the numbers are all approximate, the events are as reported in
knowledgeable news sources. This scenario just logically ties them all
together.
I'm not passing moral judgement, as Jeff and Donna created the original
Palm product and software, and "business is business". But, it explains
what's happened to Palm in the last year or so, as well as the sudden
success of Handspring in the marketplace.
My guess is Jeff and Donna and Palm exectives are still working together
closely and Palm is still following the strategy that changed them from
a hugely successful dominant operation to one of declining marketshare
and profits.
........................................................................
BG
"Bruce" <DONTbeSPAMMIN...@ricochet.net> wrote in message
news:wPdN6.491$cW2.6...@news1.mco...
>
[snip]
> The next step required will be real-time *major secure* email with
built-in
> viewing support for attachments, so the enterprise can communicate with
its
> far-flung employees (look at this budget sheet please, look at this
project
> proposal).
>
There is a paradox standing in the way of this. If the information you are
sending is rich enough to be of any value, you will need a larger display,
which is contrary to the goal of "so portable it's wearable" and you end up
pushing into a laptop/notebook computer device. So, I'll buy the feasibility
of instant messages that replace pagers, but I don't see how in hell you can
expect to send me a complex spreadsheet with several workbooks, which itself
is on the verge of overwhelming a desktop monitor. Ditto for a project plan.
I *really* don't see sending something like a MS Project file to a viewer on
the PDA without losing so much content that it becomes unusable. I can't
conceive trying to read a business document with diagrams, charts, and
tables on a PDA screen. The above mentioned budget would have to be so
simplistic not to overwhelm the device that it wouldn't have enough value to
bother with.
I say, if you can't write it on a cocktail napkin, it's too much to process
on your PDA and you need the screen size a resolution of a laptop. Which is
why small/simple pieces of self contained information like names and
addresses, phone numbers, and meeting appointments work on a PDA. Serious
business documents don't. A streaming audio/video feed is akin to a cell
phone conversation or a voice mail message, so that would work. It satisfies
the simple and self-contained parts - how much complexity is there in
"Forward, Reverse, Play, Stop" ?
Now, if you were to send it to my device, and I download it off the Palm
into a local device (whether a desktop or notebook) to do *real* work when I
can, that's something else. This would allow me to travel from one business
location to another, in essence taking everything I need a "server" for with
me. This presumes each location has the facility I need once I get there.
Sort of like going into a temporary, generic office that has a phone and
computer in it, and the stuff that's unique to my needs walks in and out the
door with me, resident on my PDA. The thing is getting enough storage
capacity in that portable package, which is solvable now or in the near
future.
> Don't make all your employees lug around an expensive laptop. Seems
pretty
> obvious.
>
Actually, it's quite the opposite. Employees who are traveling a great deal
and far distances have MORE of a justification for a laptop than a PDA,
because the PDA can't be powerful enough to allow them to be away for
extended periods of time from a real computer where they can do real work.
The PDA (as it currently exists) allows you to take the bare necessities
with you so that you can be away from the office or other infrastructure for
short periods of time, that otherwise would force you to choose between
taking a laptop (far more than you really need or want to deal with) and
nothing.
It's like you don't plan on needing a computer, but you take the PDA with
you "just in case". It's a lot like carrying a gun. If you *KNEW* you were
going to need a gun, you'd bring the shotgun (laptop). The pistol (PDA) is
for when something happens unplanned for and you need something (like a
pager message that tells you that you need to make an urgent business
meeting or phone call which you can get the number for from your phone
list). If you were in your office, you'd deal with the issue more
effectively because you have MANY more tools available. Carrying the PDA
gives you the possibility that you can deal with it adequately, without
being chained to a desk.
>
> Maybe you are saying Palm Net does not quite cut it? Perhaps, I would
not
> know.
>
>
> -BruceW
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
David
> In comp.sys.palmtops.pilot Ben Steeves <b...@localhost.localdomain> wrote:
>
> | Who cares?
>
>
> What would happen if MS bought the OS at a bankruptcy sale? Might you
> care then?
>
Even under the Bush administration this is a sale that wouldn't be
permitted.
David
> Thus spake Nick Vargish in <yyyy9ru...@adams.patriot.net>:
> >
> >Sorry, the money that Bill "gave" Apple was pretty much a court-
> >mandated settlement. Microsoft just found a way to put marketing
> >spin on the payout.
>
> Strange that the court ordered Steve Jobs to go along with this
> 'marketing spin', isn't it? One would think that he'd have been crowing
> like a rooster at sunrise if your version were so, rather than trying to
> fend back the boos of the audience so he could explain.
No, it wasn't court ordered. But if you look back - when Jobs introduced
Bill on stage and announced an end to hostilities - the money (a paltry
$150 million when Apple had several Billion in the bank) was just one
piece of the puzzle. Another piece was that Apple and Microsoft cross
licensed a huge bank of technologies thus ending several court cases
which most pundits agreed were likely to go Apple's way.
David
> Thus spake Ben Steeves in <slrn9gal9...@localhost.localdomain>:
> >On Fri, 18 May 2001 16:35:14 GMT, use...@sotobori.com
> > <use...@sotobori.com> wrote:
> >>Amazing how all of the articles are coming out now affirming
> >>what the Palm apologists are so fearful to admit.
> >
> >Last time I heard a death knell like this, it was for Apple. [...]
>
> So, does this mean that Palm is going to try to woo Hawkins back and
> receive a sizeable investment from Redmond? ;)
>
Or that Palm and Handspring will merge?
David
> In comp.sys.palmtops.pilot Satan <Sa...@palm.as> wrote:
> > Perhaps you don't realize that the only reason Apple is still around is
> > because Bill Gates decided a few years ago to keep them afloat (so he could
> > sell more programs to Apple users). Does history repeat? You'll soon see.
>
> I agree that Bill Gates has most to do with Apple still being around
> but that stubborn, loyal cult following still has pretty deep pockets
> and is always willing to shell out twice what they should for repackaged
> products and as long as they are still around, Apple will survive in one
> form or another.
>
It can indeed be argued that Bill Gates had something to do with Apple's
turn around - the promise to continue producing Office for the Mac which
was absolutely necessary. But it should be obvious to anyone with an
active brain cell or two that he had two motives. First, the loss of
Apple would have left Microsoft as the ONLY purveyor of a computer OS.
As a clearly mononpolistic company, the government would have been down
on Microsoft everytime Bill sneezed. Second, Microsoft needed Apple to
continue leading the way because we all know that the words Microsoft
and innovation go together like military and intelligence. Apple, Novell
and Linux (and a long long list more) create it and Microsoft steals it.
Now as to the idea that Mac users are stubborn or cult-like zombies, or
that they shell out double for repackaged goods...get your finger out of
your nose, dude! You obviously have dug half your brain out! Yeah, yeah,
I know. You are going to drag out your Dell P4 computer for $800 as
proof that a PC is cheaper than a Mac. Well, show me a PC notebook that
can compare in price and features to the TiBook or the iBook. Can't do
it, can you? And don't forget that half the reason PCs are so cheap
right now is because nobody is buying them and the manufacturers are
selling at a loss just to get rid of them. And the other reason is that
there isn't a single bit of innovation happening in the PC world. They
are still thinking inside the box that IBM created in 1981.
>
> > There isn't any need for you to start stockpiling Palms along with those
> > cans of green beans I hear you have in your bunker. Palm devices have a big
> > enough penetration that they will be around for at least 5 more years.
>
> I think they will be around about as long as there is not a viable
> alternative to motivate people to make a switch. Until that happens,
> they will be around, albeit in a crippled mode.
>
If Palm really cannot turn it around they will be bought out - or merge
with - one of several Palm licensees. Palm the company may disappear but
Palm the OS isn't likely to. It is just too superior to the alternative
shoveled out by the Redmond mafia.
Arthur Hagen
"David" <gaff-...@expireit.com> wrote in message
news:3b110ad1$0$62139$4c5e...@news.erinet.com...
> Toby Guidry <stran...@REMOVEmindspring.com> wrote:
>
> > So, does this mean that Palm is going to try to woo Hawkins back and
> > receive a sizeable investment from Redmond? ;)
> >
> Or that Palm and Handspring will merge?
A more likely scenario is that one of the Palm players who has money buys
them out - like Sony.
Regards,
--
*Art
Martin Thompson
Arthur Hagen <a...@broomstick.com> wrote in message
news:u5dQ6.31797$v5.25...@news1.rdc1.ct.home.com...
I agree this is the most likely scenario. But at present, why should Sony
buy Palm out? It will happen when the right combination of high sales of
Palm OS machines by Sony is put at risk by a lack of progress by Palm on
developing the OS. Or if Sony grow concerned that a competitor may buy Palm.
One possible downside for Sony is that buying Palm out may encourage other
manufacturers to move away from the Palm OS, thereby reducing the potential
user base so I'm guessing most Palm OS licensees would prefer an independant
Palm.
If I were running Palm, I'd focus every scintilla of the company's resources
on developing the OS with an additional medium term objective of developing
apps for the OS ( a la MS......). I'd use someone elses hardware and badge
it as Palm, as a first step to becoming a software only company.
This would give the company excellent focus, and would probably allow for a
major cost cutting exercise in the short term.
Palm does not have a high user base because of it's hardware, but simply
because of it's elegant OS.
(Accepting that the OS and hardware package was necessary to launch the
whole ship initially).
Regards
Martin
>
> Regards,
> --
> *Art
>
>
Craig Froehle
> If I were running Palm, I'd focus every scintilla of the company's resources
> on developing the OS with an additional medium term objective of developing
> apps for the OS ( a la MS......). I'd use someone elses hardware and badge
> it as Palm, as a first step to becoming a software only company.
> This would give the company excellent focus, and would probably allow for a
> major cost cutting exercise in the short term.
Not a bad idea, but my concern would be that licensees couldn't
manufacture devices fast enough to make up for the sudden drop in
production by Palm -- they make a huge number of PDAs, and getting a
supplier ramped up to that level can't happen overnight. Plus, you then
have to worry about tech support (if you're rebadging outsourced models
as Palm units, you still have to have a call center, etc.). Plus, if
Palm goes on an MS-esque feature addition crusade (e.g., let's bundle or
build our own MS-Office compatibility into the devices), you run the
risk of ticking off a major strength of the plaform -- its developer
base. Every tech company is facing similar hurdles right now, some a
little worse than others, as we're on a particularly nasty downside of
the business cycle. Getting caught with extra inventory is not a new
dilemma, and many other companies have survived such an event just
fine. I agree with you in that I think Palm needs to focus a bit more
on integrating and alliance-building on the hardware front (e.g.,
implement the HandEra and/or Sony APIs ASAP). Also, if Palm can't sell
their extra inventory in new markets (e.g., India, China, South
America), then they should do something really philanthropic with it
instead of crushing it all -- donating the devices to underfunded
hospitals/schools/colleges would be a marvelous publicity event as well
as prevent those future buyers from settling on another OS (once they
start using PalmOS, they're less likely to switch to another OS the next
time they upgrade). Just my thoughts...
- Craig
cr...@memoware.com
http://www.memoware.com - The PDA Document Repository
Dwayne Conyers
-- ---
Simon is ho-ome.
Art is a stra-a-anger.
http://www.dwacon.com
Peter Jaspers-Fayer
> Does this mean... gasp... Windows CE????
Never! Get a life (or buy a lap-top). :-)
--
/PJ, Peter Jaspers-Fayer p...@ovc.uoguelph.ca LTC Rm. 1601
Information Technology Services, Ontario Veterinary College
University of Guelph, 50 Stone Rd. Guelph, On. N1G 2W1 Canada.
Voice 519 824-4120 x4777 Fax 519 821-0074
Eric Lindsay's spam trap
wrote:
>There is a paradox standing in the way of this. If the information you are
>sending is rich enough to be of any value, you will need a larger display,
>which is contrary to the goal of "so portable it's wearable" and you end up
>pushing into a laptop/notebook computer device.
models around 1990, through various Psion SIBO pocket computers,
and I currently use the very largest Psion model (VGA colour
display 640x480, or 12 times the pixel count available on a
Palm). Oh yes, and I had to carry a bag to keep it in (along
with papers, camera, and other gadgets).
>Actually, it's quite the opposite. Employees who are traveling a great deal
>and far distances have MORE of a justification for a laptop than a PDA,
>because the PDA can't be powerful enough to allow them to be away for
>extended periods of time from a real computer where they can do real work.
Yes indeed, and the only reason I can get away with using a PDA
only for long periods (just got back from a two month trip) is
that some PDAs are not designed as PC companions, but as full use
computers. A PDA with over 30 MB of memory, 100 MB of "disk" and
over 100 MHz CPU is into the same sort of hardware territory as
a desktop system of only a few years ago. Even the Palm is well
into the same hardware territory as the early Macintosh or the
early PC AT. Lots of businesses found them of full time use.
Since most people have more use for a PC companion, more PC
companion PDAs get sold. Palm certainly got that right, as shown
by the sales of the Palm OS.
--
Eric Lindsay http://psiphi.server101.com/airlie
Airlie Beach Qld Australia - Great Barrier Reef entry
Psion & Epoc site http://psiphi.server101.com/epoc
Craig Froehle
>There is a paradox standing in the way of this. If the information
>you are sending is rich enough to be of any value, you will need a
>larger display, which is contrary to the goal of "so portable it's
>wearable" and you end up pushing into a laptop/notebook computer
>device.
I don't agree. "Information Richness," if taken as defined by Daft &
Lengel in the mid-80's, is not a viable or valid determinant of media
appropriateness -- many, many research studies have shown this. So,
sending "rich" information doesn't always require high-res displays --
sound is a much richer medium than plain text, and yet requires no
viewable display at all, and text has been shown to be a richer medium
than D&L would have initially predicted.
With that said, display size will soon be completely untethered from the
physical dimensions of the PDA in your hand. Virtual displays are
getting very good, and as soon as they get very cheap, too, we'll have
1600x1200 displays with full CD-quality audio no bigger than today's
cell-phone headsets.
I believe that getting information _OUT_ of the device will likely pose
less of an issue in the long run than getting information _IN_ -- after
all, handwriting is slow, typing requires a keyboard (which is big), and
voice recog has a long, long way to go before it's widely acceptable.
狂人
at 12:34 PM, mar...@psiphi.server101.com (Eric Lindsay's spam trap)
said:
>Yes indeed, and the only reason I can get away with using a PDA only for
>long periods (just got back from a two month trip) is that some PDAs are
>not designed as PC companions, but as full use computers. A PDA with over
>30 MB of memory, 100 MB of "disk" and over 100 MHz CPU is into the same
>sort of hardware territory as a desktop system of only a few years ago.
>Even the Palm is well into the same hardware territory as the early
>Macintosh or the early PC AT. Lots of businesses found them of full time
>use.
You know what's funny about that? Here's the spec of my first few
computers... :)
Apple ][ (can't remember the specs)
Clone mobo with Intel 80286-12 (1MB RAM and 40MB Fujitsu HDD)
Clone mobo with Intel 486DX-33 (8MB RAM and 120MB Maxtor HDD, and the
maxtor died pretty soon, so I had to use the Fujitsu HDD...)
Now my Sony PEG-S300 have 8MB RAM, 2MB Flash and 64MB flash in Memory
stick... :) And add up all the flash memory I have... The result is 120MB,
48MB in CF and 72MB in MS... :) The same size as my dead Maxtor HDD.
--
===Team OS/2, Team OS/2 at Taiwan, ICE News Beta Tester. Bovine Team===
======Warped Key Crucher, And OS/2 ISP CD Project Member. TBA #3======
Owner of PC End User Web Site http://www.pcenduser.com/
Java 1.1.8 - MR/2 ICE REG#:10510 - OS/2 T-Warp 4.0
ICQ# = 8943567
狂人
at 12:34 PM, mar...@psiphi.server101.com (Eric Lindsay's spam trap)
said:
>On Tue, 22 May 2001 11:28:17 -0700, "BG" <bi...@microsoft.com>
>wrote:
>>There is a paradox standing in the way of this. If the information you are
>>sending is rich enough to be of any value, you will need a larger display,
>>which is contrary to the goal of "so portable it's wearable" and you end up
>>pushing into a laptop/notebook computer device.
>Absolutely correct. My PDA use went from various large pre Palm models
>around 1990, through various Psion SIBO pocket computers, and I currently
>use the very largest Psion model (VGA colour
>display 640x480, or 12 times the pixel count available on a
>Palm). Oh yes, and I had to carry a bag to keep it in (along
>with papers, camera, and other gadgets).
I personally don't really agree with that... As with the information I'm
sending is often PLAIN TEXT E-Mail, I prefer enriching my E-Mail with more
information and data, not with HTML code. When I was travelling, Palm (Sony
PEG-S300 in this case) was more than enough for me to reply E-Mails and
communicate to various people...
As for photos, I also shoot photos digitally... With my Nikon CP990... and I
don't view photos on PDAs or screen with resolution less than 1280x1024... I
shoot at 2048*1365 resolution, and the camera's own internal viewing
function is enough to check sharpness, color and focus. and when I'm
checking photos, I use my desktop computer with a 19" DiamondTron tube (for
better color) and runs at 1600x1200x32bit... Now if you say your Psion have
VGA color display, do you mean it is running at 640x480x4bit color? Since
that IS the standard VGA color depth for that resolution... Viewing my photo
on either 4 bit or 8 bit color is something that I'll never do...
I carry everything (Phone, PDA, camera, external battery) all on my belt,
easily carried and easily retrived when I need them... I don't need to worry
about carrying an extra bag or anything. And soon I hope, I'll be able to
use Bluetooth to connect my phone and my PDA...
More resolution and color is nice to have on PDAs, but the first and
foremost is SIZE and WEIGHT... I think Palm and Sony is getting it about
right with m505 and PEG-N7x0...
Alan Anderson
>>sending is rich enough to be of any value, you will need a larger display,
>>which is contrary to the goal of "so portable it's wearable" and you end up
>>pushing into a laptop/notebook computer device.
If you're already in the "wearable" mindset, you shouldn't have a problem
with a small head-mounted display. Miniature LCD or micromirror or even
optomechanically scanned LED array eyepieces work fine to give a virtual
large screen. The really lightweight yet robust ones are unrealistically
expensive for even a powerful personal computer, much less a PDA, but the
concept is a good one.