Slashdot Mirror


Palm's Mistakes

putko writes "Mike Singer has an article at ZDNet called Five reasons for Palm's slide which describes succinctly how Palm went from owning the palmtop platform -- OS and apps -- to getting chopped into pieces (some recently sold to a Japanese firm), using an OS from Microsoft and teaming up with Microsoft. The author claims, among other things, that Palm's stuff never worked well enough with Windows (while the RIM Blackberry did), which ultimately allowed Windows Mobile to eliminate them. A hard fall for a company that really did innovate."

13 of 270 comments (clear)

  1. If it ain't broke, wait, it's broke by dada21 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've owned PDA's since the original Newton MessagePad, including every Newton model, numerous Palm Pilots, tons of proprietary junk models, halting with the HP iPAQ h6315 PDA Phone (for now).

    The Pilot was doomed from the start. As a basic contacts + calendar + to-do PDA, it was great. I guess that's why it failed: too basic.

    In my experience, basic users tend toward basic devices. I'd say nearly 30% of my consulting income for 5 years was helping basic company managers getting their Palms to work. Once they worked (synced, etc), these basic users spent more time navigating the software than using it efficiently. The working install rarely worked for long. My corporate customers hated the software. "Just get it working" was common to hear.

    I'd considered teaching users how to really achieve PDA efficiency, but the Pilots that were so plentiful were just not powerful enough and frustrated me. I can't handle spending 30 seconds finding information that took 5 seconds in a paper dayplanner.

    Then I started to realize something: people were buying these in a fad fashion. Many used only the calculator or a simple name+phone contact list. Not a renewable market there.

    My PDA Phone is great because it is easily customizable, has enough software to give me options, and it has the Internet. But in the hands of a basic user, I'd see them using only the phone part. These devices just don't scream "easy to use."

    Apple can turn this market on its head. I don't see them doing it (again), but if there is any market that needs a unique interface, the PDA market is it.

    I'm not a pro-Apple guy. My lady has an iPod, I have no Macs. Yet I loved my Newtons. I can still efficiently use them, and basic users loved mine.

    The Palm's limited resolution, limited speed, amd limited memory killed it. The market wasn't ready. There were too few customers. The economy of spending millions on the ultimate interface is not there, yet.

    The cell phone market will help, as the best interface models get combined with one another. SMS messaging will usher in the perfect mini keyboard someday.

    It will take time.

    PS The Blackberry has to be a fad fluke. It feels like a Speak 'N Spell.

    1. Re:If it ain't broke, wait, it's broke by KiltedKnight · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Sometimes, having something basic with a good, widely available SDK can be an advantage. It allows people, companies, etc, to build applications to do what is needed. It's how DOS and Windows got so big... they made SDKs widely available while trying to cover the basics, and others started developing the applications.

      Me? I don't like having my PDA and phone as a single unit. I don't like overly large cell phones, and sometimes find myself needing to use a PDA while talking on the phone... so unless you have a speaker phone built in, it can be rather difficult.

      --
      OCO is Loco
    2. Re:If it ain't broke, wait, it's broke by FreezerJam · · Score: 4, Interesting

      While you might think the Palm devices weren't really powerful, compared to the vast majority of "organizers" that sold at low prices (that is - everything else besides the Newton) they were quite powerful and highly flexible. You could write software for them!

      One thing not mentioned in the article is that cell carriers may not have liked the Palm precisely because it offered that flexibility, limited as it may have been. Carriers want to be solution providers, not platform supporters. If you need software on your mobile device, they want to be in the loop. The Palm devices work against that idea, making them a tougher sell to carrier buyers. Remember the first Windows phones from Orange - and the first thing the users did was hack them to allow users to install their own software?

      The one item that truly irks me is the poor support for WiFi. The WiFi SD card was announced in early 2003. The Tungsten E came out in late 2003 - but it has never supported the WiFi cards. Palm in general seems to have given only a passing thought to wireless LAN support. That just won't fly anymore - heck, the NINTENDO has WiFi!!

    3. Re:If it ain't broke, wait, it's broke by dada21 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The 'solution provider' note is a good one. T-Mobile killed off my model based on excessive platform support costs. Mine never gave me trouble but thousands of users did.

      As for WiFi, my model has BT, WiFi and GPRS. My GPRS hits about 3.2K/s down and 0.9K/s up. Its perfect for slashdot, news.google, lewrockwell, e-mail, basic FTP and other tasks. WiFi sucks because the battery life is horrible. There's no solution for this yet, but WiFi needs constant polling whereas GPRS' packet based transceiving is more energy efficient.

      The upside of using only my GPRS connection is that I don't deal with data bloat. I had DSL since the beta stages, now I'm back to sub-dial-up speeds and ecstatic.

      WiFi is useless to me now. No data bloat = no need for high speed anything.

    4. Re:If it ain't broke, wait, it's broke by soft_guy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The Pilot was doomed from the start. As a basic contacts + calendar + to-do PDA, it was great. I guess that's why it failed: too basic.

      Are you kidding me? The original Palm Pilot sold in huge numbers and was wildly successful by any measure you want to take. At the time I remember reading it was the most successful consumer electronics product ever. People were talking abouts adoption curve being steeper than television, VCRs, transitor radios, personal computers, cell phones, etc.

      I too was/am a fan of the Newton, but you shouldn't be blind to the reasons why the Newton did not sell anywhere near the numbers that Palm sold. I think it comes down to three factors: size, speed, and connectivity.

      Most Palm organizers can go into your shirt pocket. There was no Newton ever close to being that small. The OMP was the size of a day runner and three times as heavy. The best of the group - the MessagePad 2X00 was even larger. I worked for a company that made medical software for the Newton and we would advertise it as "fits in your lab coat pocket." which it did. Shirt pocket - no way.

      Also, the Palm did a great job of feeling responsive to the user. Remember how on most of the Newton models, you would press the page down control and the whole system would stop for about 5-6 seconds? I think that was something people wouldn't put up with. The Newton 2000 fixed that, but Palm was able to pull that off with a motorola 68000 processor and still have better battery life than Newton. The Newton OS was engineered to be a nice modern OS that would be easily maintainable and nice to use far into the future - at the expense of some of Apple's immediate needs. Palm was like the opposite of that and that's why today the thing seems long in the tooth.

      And finally, connectivity was an area where the original Palm far exceeded the Newton. Do you remember Apple trying to charge like $150 for the Newton Connectivity Kit on the original MessagePad? That was insane - and the connectivity just got worse from there! The best Newton connectivity solution by far was Dan Rowley's X-Port product. There was a thing you could get to synchronize with Outlook for Windows, but again it was third party and not available until Newton 2.0 had shipped. Apple's connectivity SDK for developers was always buggy and perpetually late. They never shipped any connectivity solution worthy of the device.

      Palm, on the other hand, had the hot sync and their conduit SDK which was relatively easy to program. They had good synchronization with Outlook and other apps - at least via the cradle.

      I will agree that in recent years, WinCE devices have surpassed Palm in synchronization and so have Blackberry devices. Also, Palm screwed themselves by not standardizing on one type of cradle/charger and sticking to it. It hurt their customers and it hurt their own inventory management.

      In short, Palm got a lot closer to the mark than Newton, but still never followed through on what their cool devices should have been.

      Oh, and not releasing a device with WiFi and Blue Tooth together was stupid. I am aware of the technical reasons why, but it is still stupid. They should have had Blue Tooth and Wifi on the Treo 600 and had a nicer screen, and more built in software. Towards the end, they just couldn't get all the cool features on a single device.

      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
  2. What about successes? by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Mistakes? What about what Palm did right? e.g. Realizing that everyone didn't want to play movies/music on their handheld? Or their strong focus on using the Palm as a satellite device, and not as a REALLY SLOW desktop replacement. (I don't know what Microsoft was thinking with their Word and Excel CE versions... no wait, yes I do. They weren't thinking.) Not to mention their slowness to move to color screens when high quality grayscale provided a better experience and better battery life.

    If anything, I think Palm's biggest "mistake" was their push for expensive networking features when no good infrastructure existed. Their devices kept going up in cost over useless features all while they stuck with that hideous dragonball processor and low-res screens. Thank God for Sony and their Clie series, or Palm never would have gotten their heads out of their rears. Sadly, it may have been too little, too late.

    1. Re:What about successes? by KDan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Agreed... I recently got a Tungsten E2 for waaaay cheaper than any of the non-Palm PDAs and it does everything I want it to do perfectly - read books, keep track of calendar entries, write down ideas, put tidbits of info on the scratchpad, etc. Why pay more than twice the price for extra functionality that I don't use? Palm fills a very useful niche for me.

      Daniel

      --
      Carpe Diem
  3. Re:palm os by MyLongNickName · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Pushing Palm? Palm fell on its rear, and got drug along. I owned a Palm, and it was the most frustrating device. Interoperability was horrible. I swore off PDA's at that point. Years later, I picked up an iPaq. Took me months to decide to bite the bullet after my prior experience. I still use the thing every day.

    Bottom line: Palm would still be the leader had it supported better OS interoperability, and not been so anal about 3rd party developers back in the day.

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
  4. Or Macs by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 4, Interesting
    They never worked so hot with Macs, either.

    Although I was one of the only people who liked Graffiti. I thought it was really intuitive.

  5. pioneered not failed by BozoTheScary · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Palm helped pioneer the industry (following on previous work by Apple, etc.), then the leadership sold it and moved on. As such, it has been little more than a copyrighted name since then. It represented some visionary work and when the visionaries walked away, the copyright's value slowly disappeared. It wasn't a failure, even though the products that now are Palm are failures. Microsoft, et al, have picked up where Palm's visionaries left off, much as Palm did with its predecessors.

  6. Re:Really did innovate- not recently by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The Palm OS has stagnated. Windows Mobile for all its flaws is simply a better OS.

    This really isn't true either. The truth is that both OSes and devices sucked, and that consumers are finally giving up on them. On one hand you had the Palm Pilot. It was a good device, sized perfectly for a satellite device, but failed to keep up with improvements in embedded technology, memory needs, and display resolutions. In the end, the device ended up being overpriced for too little power.

    On the other hand you've got WinCE devices. They're far more powerful, have color screens, run Microsoft software, play multimedia, and they do it all for seemingly no reason what-so-ever. In the Real World(TM) it seems that no one really is looking to play movies on their tiny handheld screens, nor are they looking to wait five minutes for Excel CE to come up so they can do computations they could have done on the back of a napkin in less time.

    So then along comes the Blackberry. The idea is seemingly stupid. It's a super-simple email reader with an analog coupler for a modem. It flops. Then they add wireless support. Suddenly, everyone loves the thing. It's the pager/personal organizer that everyone wanted. It does what they need and it does it simply. You have your email at all times, and you can even type a simple message without resorting to a stylus. So where are all the Palms and WinCE devices now? Replaced by BlackBerries. Funny how the world works, eh?

    (Disclaimer: My wife uses her Palm everyday to manage our home and finances. She can't live without the thing.)

  7. Palm's Windows software killed them by fsck! · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Our network is heavily FOSS-biased and run Windows only on the desktops, jumping through hoops to avoid giving Microsoft a cent more than I am legally obligated to. That being said, I won't let my users connect their Palms to our desktops. It's way to hard to get working with non-privilaged users. If they want a PDA, they have to go PocketPC. The software does what you expect it to do. Works regardless of privilage level, syncs with Outlook without clumsy and expensive 3rd party software, and did I mention that it actually works?

    Palm, who buys PDAs? Business people. What software do business people use? Windows and Outlook. In most businesses that have a lot of people with PDAs, do they all have Administrative rights? I sure hope not, but that's what you designed your software for. You deserve to loose your market share, you bastards.

  8. So? by tengwar · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I'll shed no tears for Palm. It's always been a barely adequate platform for basic organiser functions, redeemed only by usable writing recognition. It's stable only by comparison to Wince machines. Psion, on the other hand, made rcok-solid machines that got turned on at the factory and usually ran for years without crashing, with heavy loads of third-party software. Those machines were general-purpose computers, not just adjuncts to a PC desktop. On my first Psion (6MHz 8086, 256kb RAM shared between core and secondary storage) I once produced a church address book by entering the data into the contacts application, exporting in CSV to the spreadsheet to sort, then move to the word processor for formatting and printing [directly, not via a PC]). That was, I think, before the Palm Pilot was on sale. The later machines moved to the EPOC OS and ARM processors. I used to use the precursor of the current TomTom navigation system on a Psion 5: I had maps for most of Europe on a small Compact Flash drive, with enough detail to show a 3' alleyway in my home town. Even the built-in applications were impressive: for instance the word-processor would handle embedded objects (spreadsheets and drawings as standard) perfectly . At the time MS Office applications attempted to do this, but tended to crash with corrupted documents if you actually used the feature. I find it easy to use the (rare) large Psions - Netbook and Series 7 - to take notes in meetings, since I can type, then move quickly to sketch a diagram on the touch screen directly into the document. Tablet PCs can probably do this now, but they are bigger, more expensive, and don't have enough battery life to work for a day away from the mains.

    When Psion stopped making consumer hardware, it was like hearing the news about Concorde stopping flying. We'd taken a great step backwards: there was nothing out there which would come close to what a Psion would do routinely, in terms of stability, application support, usability, and preceived speed. I've used Palm and Wince before and after, but both are too unstable to trust completely. Wince these days is fast enough, at the expense of battery life, but Palm hardly seems to have changed. The closest equivalents to the Psion 5 now are the Nokia 9300 and 9500, which use a later version of the OS. Nice smartphones, but they have a fraction of the battery life, perhaps 20% of the speed, and my 9300 reset itself within a week of buying it. In a sense Psion deserved to fail in the consumer space. They spent very little on advertising, and never moved to support features we would now consider essential such as USB and Bluetooth. Still, they remain the only "real" PDAs in my entirely unbiased opinion.