Slashdot Mirror
Palm OS Spinoff
iCharles writes "According to this SEC filing per this Palm Infocenter story, it would appear that Palm is spinning off its OS devision. I'm a Handspring user, so it sounds quite interesting to me."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Now if we could only convince Microsoft to do the same thing!
Of course, Handspring tends to customize their OSes heavily to fit their hardware. 3.1H and 3.5.2H(x) are relatively substantial retrofits. I love the fact that the PalmOS is such a streamlined, efficient tool. I think as its own company, focused on the OS, they could really do some good. OTOH it could shake Palm's grip on the market further... but if the market really expands, hey, maybe there's room.
sounds like a great idea, PalmOS dev seemed to be stagnating for the last year or so, since 2.5 actually.
and we stood and watched as WinCE got stronger and the Journada and the iPaq get better and better.
i hope this lights some creative fire in both divisions. I wonder if Palm hardware will be modified to run Linux or WinCE?
The story mentions that at least one future Palm is going to be using an ARM processor (Hercules 1.0). i guess that means we'll finally see linux on genuine Palm(tm) hardware, at the expense of have a cool processor name like the Dragonball VZ.
It also brings up interesting prospects for the future of Palm OS. If Palm's OS division is making a Palm OS for an ARM processor, will we start to see Palm OS as an option on iPaq's and th like? It's just my personal opinion, but I like Palm's interface more than WinCE, but right now, the hardware that runs it is slower. I guess we'll see.
Palm currently owns BeOS. If Palm is spinning off its operating systems division, this new division will probably own BeOS. Is this a good thing?
Will I retire or break 10K?
been the plan? Even if it hasn't, it is never the less a good idea. It will put 3Com on the same footing as all the other PalmOS licensees. They will no longer have access to the latest features. We may also see the advances that are really needed to fully squash PowerPC (2002? I think that's the latest version) come from Palm, as opposed to licensees. The licensees won't have to work quite as hard to differentiate themselves from the Pocket PC devices. The really great advances will be standard across the majority of the devices.
Port Palm OS to the PC or something? That could be interesting....
Palm must have really wanted to Mr. Nagel to leave his job at AT&T because his compensation package is a sweet deal. In addition to his $620 thousand salary he got a $200 thousand hiring bonus and can participate in a discretionary cash bonus plan giving him up to 70% of his base salary.
Not sure if that was a wise choice, leaving ATT Labs... They have some sweet projects. In fact im using VNC right now. Thou a 650K a year, damn...
I'd get rid PalmOS too.
Palm sees the writing on the wall.
You mean the Grafiti on the wall?
*rimshot*
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Unfortunate because:
#1 - Having the OS and hardware made by the same company is IMHO part of what has kept the Palm stable enough to be useable in a "if this crashes with my [flight information / meeting notes / date's phone number] in it, I'm screwed" sort of way. As Apple has shown, there are definite advantages to having the hardware and software guys on the same team.
#2 - As anyone who's dealt with Windoze will attest, the "it's their fault" / "no its THEIR fault" blame shifting that goes on between software and hardware vendors whenever a conflict comes up can only mean one thing: much longer waiting times before issues are resolved. With present-day Palm, like with Apple, we the consumer can say "your problem, you fix it!" and, while they may not fix it, they at least have to acknowledge that, hardware or software, its their company's problem and not some other company's problem.
#3 - Dilution of the OS. The Palm OS works as well as it does because it is purpose built. I daresay Win CE has, as one of its many faults, the "all things to all people" problem, which makes it bloated and cumbersome and all that. Once a seperate company owns the Palm OS, logically they would seek to expand it across as many different pieces of hardware as possible, to maximize revenue and marketshare. As the OS is rewritten to run on more and more things, it moves away from the original "here's the OS we wrote to run on this one little machine" and closer to "here's a Windows CE competitor. Hey Bill! Come and crush us!".
Obviously, I'm no expert. But its food for thought.
-- "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge." (Charles Darwin)
One of the problems with dealing with the Palm OS is the brick wall you hit when you want to extend the OS. To get access to parts of the OS source code, you have to go through all sorts of rigmorole, signing NDAs, etc. Maybe now with the spinoff, they might Open Source it.
:)
One project I was investigating recently was to see whether I could replace the default HotSync mechanism with a dynamically compressed XML-RPC connection so that systems could connect to the Palm across the Internet, and vice versa, thus obviating the whole PC HotSync requirement. I eventually lost enthusiasm for it, though, given the huge task of reimplementing the same mechanisms used by the HotSync subsystem, without the benefit of OS source.
Maybe if they Open Source it, I might reinvestigate doing it.
Maybe they're going to reduce the BeOS kernel into something that runs on a Palm Pilot. I thought on the same token, Win CE is based on Win NT.
One might hope for a BeOS desktop and palmtop along the same lines as Windows.
Just a thought.
OS/2 - because choice is a terrible thing to waste.
When Palm eventually moves to ARM-based hardware, I'm sure we'll see creative, inventive people making Linux ROM images for the hardware the same as they have for the iPAQ. But they won't be coming from Palm Solutions (the hardware/parent company), and I sincerely doubt they will be coming from any of the licensees. Why jump ship from a platform that had 80% of the retail market in August of this year, in addition to 80%-90% of the market for the past six years? That's foolish.
In addition, there is a world of difference between a Linux PDA and a Palm PDA. The PalmOS is built from the ground up as a handheld, all-in-RAM, XIP OS. Linux is originally a server OS. Yes, there has been absolutely astounding work in recent years in bringing Linux into embedded systems, but that's not enough. The paradigm of Linux is the same as the paradigm of the PocketPCs; a file system. The PalmOS has no file system, save for on expansion cards which are a new development. It's a database-like in-RAM format. That's what makes it so fast. You can get better performance out of a 33MHz Palm than you do out of a 150MHz PocketPC. There's a fundamental archetectural reason for that. Sure, Linux and Win32 may be familiar for many developers, but in order to do it right you need an archetecture and API that is designed for that type of system.
There's also the UI issue. The Palm UI was designed with Mac-like simplicity and consistency from the get-go. (Not surprising, considering that the majority of the founders were ex-Apple ane ex-Newton people.) The "Zen of Palm", alternately the subject of praise and flame wars, is really what made this organizer work as a portable computer. For cultural reasons, Linux doesn't have that. We (Slashdot readers) put up with a great deal more disparity in UI across a Linux desktop than a handheld user is willing to deal with. Simply throwing KDE or QT at it won't solve the problem of a UI that is consistent, learnable, and has almost zero learning curve.
Sure, a company could take the Linux kernel and tools and write a Palm-esque interface for it, and rewrite the guts enough to be naturally resource-based XIP. But by that point, you're almost writing a new OS to start with. And every company is going to have their own "redux Tux", which means you won't be able to generate a single executable file that you can throw on any device, the way you can with a Palm. One truism of the Open Source / Free Software (whichever camp you are in) movement is a lack of unity in APIs and UI. That will kill any mass market attempt at a handheld. The market is not interested in a device you can tweak and customize and recompile. It wants a device you can charge, pickup, and use. And at least right now, Linux is not that.
--GrouchoMarx
Card-carrying member of the EFF, FSF, and ACLU. Are you?
Let's see, Palm CEO announced this in June, the official press release came out in July, and it is only now hitting Slashdot?
Three fourths of News is New.
Incidentally, let's all hope that they drop the Newco moniker.
You know, I don't think Micro$oft really understands this concept very well. On the other hand, perhaps they realize that the Gov doesn't force them to be non-monopolistic, so they take every advantage of it.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
It may sound like a good idea to separate the OS from the HW company. It might attract other HW companies to use the OS.
Psion did this with their OS (EPOC). The OS was transferred to Symbian. The idea was to let other companies such as Nokia, Ericsson, Motorola, etc use the OS in their new mobile phones. I don't think they were successfull. Motorola cancelled their product...
Now Psion has stopped making new PDAs using EPOC. PocketPC seems to be the winner here.
I really hope that Palm does not go the same route. If PalmOS looses market share, would Palm simply make a PocketPC-based PDA with some simple apps for migrating from PalmOS?
)9TSS
Why does Palm think they're about to, in any way, create a new hardware device that they think will surpass these existing innovative devices? Palm is ALWAYS behind the curve on hardware advances in this area. We're not even talking about comparing them to the iPAQ, VTech Helio, Agenda, Yopy, and the other dozens of non-PalmOS, non-WinCE handheld PDA devices.
Currently, Palm's OEMs for the PalmOS® software include:
They get licensing from each and every one of these OEMs. Their hardware is the last thing to ever be updated. It is without a doubt, the least innovative portion of their business.. and they're choosing to keep it?!
I don't quite understand the motive behind this decision on their part. I suppose I'll find out at Palmsource in February.
According to industry analysts, WinCE is on the way up while Palm will go down due to lack of multimedia features and beeing a "real computing platform" instead of an organizer.
Changing direction for Palm is clever, but one has to ask if they aren't late: Developing a new OS might take 2 years, while WinCE is pretty much there.
Disclaimer: Yes, I have a Palm. No, I dislike MS.
Running Qt/Embedded has all sorts of disadvantages, however:
There are two predominant environments for writing GUI apps on Linux handhelds: FLTK and Java, both using X11 as the display server. I doubt anything else is going to catch on widely.
Damn! I haven't realized that the situation was as bad as needing to re-phrase "layoffs" as "spinoffs". The job carroussel must sure be turning fast these days.
+++ath0
i figure if palm spins off anymore we'll soon have a company that makes stylii and only stylii. needless, the idea of a separate palm OS company sounds promising
-
I think you are right: WinCE was never a contender. Palm may or may not be the future, but it does something that I don't think WinCE does, or a port of Linux would: fit the market. I don't hide I perfer NT to Linux. However, when I went out this year to get a new PDA, I didn't get a WinCE device.
Why? WinCE wasn't trying to be a handheld. It is trying to be a slimmed down version of a desktop OS. While it does enable some interesting ports (I'm still waiting for a port of Perl to the Palm (what a tounge twister!)) for a lot of PDA use (calander, to-do list, contacts, quick notes), it isn't the right model.
Palm, on the other hand, seems to do better. Perhaps Linux would with the right mix of apps, but I simply don't see it scaling that way and fitting into the day-to-day life of the average user.
Perhaps, instead, it will be a third (or, in this case, fourth) thing all together. Are there any serious PDA OSs out there aside from Palm and WinCE?
Lets not forget they recently picked up BeOS... I have a feeling that Palm is either staging their deaths, or trying gain some new market position in a brilliant manner. Its going to be really interesting to watch.
Skiers and Riders -- http://www.snowjournal.com
The Zoomer used a V20 CPU and had 1MB of ram and 4MB of rom. It had stroke-based handwriting recognition (a first in portable devices) and a GREAT selection of bundled apps, including a 20 language translator (which didn't have a word for "computer" in it, oddly - it would come in handy when trying to explain what the hell you were scribbling on) and a currency converter - Imagine that!
The software was PC-GEOS, with basically three new things; An updated digitizer driver to support the input method, a new CGA driver to support a 384 wide by 512 high mono CGA display, and handwriting recognition. It was at least as stable as PalmOS with a hack or two, and had a whole hell of a lot more bundled software. I don't remember what kind of expansion it had, I seem to recall it took Type 2 flash cards from sandisk. I think I had a 1.8 MB card.
Anyway, I mention it because it was Palm's first job, they did the GEOS and apps bundle for it. It was actually a pretty cool little device, and it's also where Graffiti, the PalmOS' input method came from; Graffiti was originally an upgrade for the Zoomer. You loaded it and it created a little box you drew your characters in. The Zoomer's text input was done all over the screen. Graffiti differs from the original handwriting recognition largely in that there are no multi-stroke characters.
So now they're "spinning off" the software division? Big shock. They worked well as an independent company; Now that there's quotes around that, they should at least be able to get most of their efficiency going again. I refuse to speculate on any Be issues, though.
Side note; You can put GEOS on a GRiDPad 1710, and use the version of Graffiti from the Zoomer on it. I know this because I've done it. I need to make up some new battery packs for my GRiDPad, though. I'd really like to have it available while I work on my car, so I can take notes and whatnot. It's got a big (640x400x1bpp) monochrome CGA display, which is supported by GEOS' default CGA driver, a tethered pen which is actually better for industrial use because you can't lose the damn thing, and a nice, bright backlight. Hell, I've found my keys by that backlight before.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Running Qt/Embedded has all sorts of disadvantages, however:
You can't use X11 remote display for development on/for the handheld anymore.
Use VNC instead then. VNC is also much more useful than X once the palmtop is out in the wild - palmtops don't usually have constant network access when they're in your pocket, and VNC can detach and reattach easily to existing sessions, even if you change your IP address in the mean time. X requires a constant network connection or else the app that you're running over X dies.
You can't share the handheld screen between applications written in different toolkits anymore.
And this is a bad thing? Personally I'd be very happy to see embedded Linux not making the same usability mistakes that desktop Linux has in the past, and which it is only now recovering from. Lots of toolkits == inconsistent interface == usability problems. Diversity is great, but there are places where it is inappropriate, and user interface is one of them. Not to mention the bloat aspect of having multiple toolkits...
You are tied to a single toolkit for handheld development.
See above.
Don't forget that Qt/embedded is also API-compatible with Qt/X11, which means that porting Qt apps from the Linux desktop is a cinch - and that's how Opera and Konq/e have been so rapidly successful - they are both based on Qt. Don't underestimate the importance of having a good browser for a palmtop. The only browsers I've seen for X11 that are optimized for display on a small palmtop screen are... Opera and Konq/e. You might as well run them under Qt/embedded.
How many full-blown browsers do you know written in FLTK or Java? Maybe when there's a nice tiny browser for FLTK using Gecko as a rendering engine there'll be something to talk about.
As for size, well, perhaps TinyX+FLTK+Blackbox really is no bigger than Qt/e. But think about what you get with Qt - Signals and Slots, a fast and very powerful canvas widget, full-blown Unicode support, in fact, all the nice features that have made Qt a huge success on the desktop. And, as I've said above, porting the multitude of existing Qt desktop apps is a no-brainer. Not to mention of course that the superb QPE is available, so if you want a complete environment for your users, it's just a compile away. No additional coding required.
FLTK doesn't offer any of this. In fact, no current X11 toolkit other than Qt itself offers all this. If you start adding other toolkits on top of TinyX then you can make up for some of the more important features... but oops, there goes your size, and your consistent interface.
If you have political problems with Qt, then say. You certainly seem to be short on valid technical problems.