Will Palm License the WebOS?

[Hook]

Is it likely that this new OS will be available to be liscenced from others as Palm OS was? Just curious. Probably way too early to even think about that.

[minimalposter]

I did read that Palm would consider liscensing WebOS in the future (let the Sony Clie rumors run wild!) but not now.

If I wasn't on my Treo I would link to the article. sorry.

[Ed Hardy]

Whatever you have read is incorrect. Palm is not going to make the same mistake twice. It has said repeatedly that it developed the webOS solely for its own use, and will not license it to any other company.
-

[yorker]

It also is better, because they don't have to go into issues with others building different hardware that doesn't perform well with the OS, as Windows Mobile is going to do, as Ed had published the article today about Windows decision to limit the number of WM devices. So the developers don't have to make separate applications that are for QVGA, HVGA, or VGA screens, same with the processors.

Less is more.

[Hook]

Makes sense to me. It was idle curiosity on my part. I really don't think this question, a very minor aside on another post, deserved a thread, but so be it.

[Mi An]

It also is better, because they don't have to go into issues with others building different hardware that doesn't perform well with the OS, as Windows Mobile is going to do, as Ed had published the article today about Windows decision to limit the number of WM devices. So the developers don't have to make separate applications that are for QVGA, HVGA, or VGA screens, same with the processors.

Less is more.

I disagree (that it's better not to license). Competition is better, and leads to better results for consumers. Palm isn't going to provide the perfect hardware config/layout for everyone, but another company might. The Palm platform wasn't ruined by underperforming 3rd party companies, and the failure of the spinoff OS company had nothing to do with licensing being a bad idea.

Heck, Virtually the ENTIRE palm lineup of the past couple of years, the treo and its spawn, were the brainchild of a 3rd party Palm purchased. If palm hadn't been licensed, I don't think there would be a decent bridge product that would keep them alive to now. I suspect Palm would be dead without Handspring. Sony made awesome devices, and the Zodiac was one of a kind. Palm hardware improved because of competition with their own OS.

WinMo might be thinning the herd, and there's nothing wrong with cutting off bad hardware makers or narrowing the specs, but its variety of hardware is pretty much the platform's biggest strength. It leads to greater software development and a more a tailored experience for users.

I'd love to see webos (with whatever palm legacy support I believe is coming) on some HTC devices.

[_Q_]

I disagree (that it's better not to license). Competition is better, and leads to better results for consumers. Palm isn't going to provide the perfect hardware config/layout for everyone, but another company might. The Palm platform wasn't ruined by underperforming 3rd party companies, and the failure of the spinoff OS company had nothing to do with licensing being a bad idea.

Heck, Virtually the ENTIRE palm lineup of the past couple of years, the treo and its spawn, were the brainchild of a 3rd party Palm purchased. If palm hadn't been licensed, I don't think there would be a decent bridge product that would keep them alive to now. I suspect Palm would be dead without Handspring. Sony made awesome devices, and the Zodiac was one of a kind. Palm hardware improved because of competition with their own OS.

WinMo might be thinning the herd, and there's nothing wrong with cutting off bad hardware makers or narrowing the specs, but its variety of hardware is pretty much the platform's biggest strength. It leads to greater software development and a more a tailored experience for users.

There's major competition in the smartphone market already among the various platforms (vs. the PDA days when Palm OS had the lion's share of the overall market). Too many different devices and it's easy for them to get lost in the shuffle.

Now, with their demo of the Pre, Palm has a shot at being a much bigger player than before, when they were seen as limping toward collapse and it wasn't clear if they could keep going to unveil what we saw at CES. If other platforms lose ground, it might make sense for Palm to consider licensing the new WebOS--if they felt they could apply the lessons learned from the last go-round. Big if there.

I'd love to see webos (with whatever palm legacy support I believe is coming) on some HTC devices.

Someone claimed that Palm had HTC build the Pre. I'm not sure who or where--it was someone's comment, not anything quoted or clearly substantiated, so take it with plenty of salt. My point is that this is likely to be HTC's involvement--building and collaborating in the design of Palm-branded devices, not running WebOS on HTC-branded hardware.

[Mi An]

There's major competition in the smartphone market already among the various platforms (vs. the PDA days when Palm OS had the lion's share of the overall market).

There's no hardware competition for the Palm platform--the same kind that made it better back in the day--and THAT platform has suffered because of it. Pre and webos would benefit from hardware makers offering options Palm doesn't care to offer itself.

No one said we have to have unlimited and poorly running options run amuck. But there is more than one way to build a smartphone, and Palm has a tendency to get tunnel vision and be extra risk averse when no one else is pushing.

[Dick Tracy]

There's no hardware competition for the Palm platform--the same kind that made it better back in the day--and THAT platform has suffered because of it. Pre and webos would benefit from hardware makers offering options Palm doesn't care to offer itself.

One could say the same thing about lack of hardware competition for Blackberries and the iPhone.

[hal]

Whatever you have read is incorrect. Palm is not going to make the same mistake twice. It has said repeatedly that it developed the webOS solely for its own use, and will not license it to any other company.
-

Enlighten me, please. Why do you state that it was a mistake to license the Palm OS in the past?