Slashdot Mirror
HP Spinning Off WebOS and Exiting Hardware Business
A number of readers submitted rumors about some announcements HP was set to make today. Now, the announcements have actually happened, and the news looks grim. For starters, they are exiting the tablet and phone market and repositioning webOS for use in appliances and vehicles. While confirming they are in talks to acquire Autonomy, they also announced they are considering exiting the PC hardware business entirely in order to focus on their software business.
I hope that HP will somehow weather the turbulence and emerge stronger than ever. This is the company that built Silicon Valley and for decades was the benchmark for tech innovation, and it's so painful to watch them floundering like this. And I'm especially saddened that WebOS never really had a chance to strut it's stuff. I'm a very happy iPad owner, but I have the greatest respect and admiration for what the Palm team accomplished with WebOS's interface, and I was hoping that it would take off and keep Apple on their toes.
I personally blame Carly Fiorina for the travails of a once-proud company.
So can I get a TouchPad for $100 now?
The TouchPad has only been on sale for over a month. It doesn't really have many apps. Did they really expect it to sell out? I really like to know what their expectations were. It seems pulling the plug after such a short time suggests they didn't think it was going take a while to make traction against Apple's iPad.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
for the same reason Carly fired almost all of R&D, sold the itanium engineers to Intel, and considered getting out the printer market, despite those sales being the majority of their revenue: greed, short-sightedness, selfishness, and the desire to be seen in the news.
You have to work really hard for that PC dollar. In desktop PCs Microsoft makes several times the profit dollars per unit than HP or Lenovo does. Lenovo's crowing about "huge" $100M profits on $5B sales right now- about 2 percent. That's a lot of work and risk for $100M profit to be a good thing. You could blow $100M just by, say, building an initial run of half a million tablets that don't sell.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
that's keeping a lot of people employed
I obviously wasn't intending to talk about anything like this, but hey, you brought it up. :P So this statement you made is one that I see a lot of people making and I think it shows a disconnect between the understanding of what a profit actually means and what jobs are. You probably don't want to hear about it, but it bothers me, so deal.
A profit is far more than just making moneyIt shows that you are creating wealth. One of the fundamental law of economics is that trade creates wealth. By trading, you should end up with more than you gave up. When you can't make a profit, it shows that resources are being improperly allocated. If HP decides they suck at PCs and close down, that doesn't mean those jobs and resources are lost. It means they have to be reallocated. If HP sold 1,000,000 PCs a year, that doesn't mean there are 1,000,000 PCs less going to be purchased. A business staying around that doesn't make a profit is preventing those resources from being used by a company that can make better use of them and create more wealth. This creation of wealth is one of the biggest assets to the advancement of humanity and to encourage the opposite prevents progress from happening. The problem that a lot of people have, of course, is that the wealth ends up in the hands of the top and the elite, but this frustration should not be used to advocate the prevention of wealth creation. This is the result of very different causes.
I couldn't care less about Fiorina's personality, and frankly it has no bearing on the success of the company. By all accounts Steve Jobs is a complete asshole to work for, the proverbial boss from hell, but investors will forgive anything if he delivers results. Fiorina did not deliver, and the acquisition of Compaq was in my opinion a dramatic strategic mistake. The culture of engineering innovation at HP seemed to go out the window on her watch, and the company became a low-margin mass producer.
I've compared her before with Steve Ballmer of Microsoft. Both come from marketing backgrounds; when both assumed leadership of their respective companies engineers took a distant back seat; and investors rewarded both with flat stock prices in recognition of their inability to innovate and grow the business.