IE 9 is not perfect. It may not even have all of the bells and whistles of Chrome. But that doesn't mean it sucks. Infact it is a great modern browser in the same league as FF and Chrome. The trolling makes people like your employer more likely to stick with IE7/8 which is MUCH WORSE as they feel it is all bad anyway.
I am not an IE advocate by any sense of the means but I would be greatful if IE users finally kicked older IE 8 to the curb and migrated to IE 9 so we can have a more modern web that is not reserved for our phones only.
The trolls here are making a 8% slower benchmark make it look like IE 9 is somehow suckly like IE 6 or IE 7 that is 4000% slower than a modern browser.
IE 9 might not be perfect but it is in the same league as FF and Chrome and certainly not bad. If you are stuck at work, IE 9 is a great upgrade and is certainly tolerable.
IE 9 has a great javascript engine as evident by the sunspider benchmarks and OMG it fails Google's own benchmark but it is still 600% faster than IE 8 is rediculous.
Ask anyone who has used Opera from 2001 - 2002? IE 6 was a decent browser but had security issues you had to watch out for.
IE 6 is very old and the whole CSS box model was because the implementation was not invented yet and it was just a spec for CSS 1.
Keep in mind we are talking about browsers being written when president Clinton was in office and AOL was the most popular ISP. Infact some prefered AOL over the internet. This was how long ago old Opera and IE 6 were. Trying to get Ajax to work today is why IE 6 appears so chaotic. It simply was not designed for it or it will work poorly.
Because some people wont ever leave IE. Companies and inviduals who first started using the internet with IE 6. We are geeks and most of us started using computers in the 1990s or even 1980s or earlier. Most average people started in the late 1990s so XP/ME with IE is all they know.
If IE acts like Chrome or Firefox then why should we care? IE 10 will rival Chrome with HTML 5 features and probably the most conformant bugfree javascript available with full hardware acceleration. It will be a competitve browser.
I am trying to start an e-Commerce business and I discovered the horror of coding to IE 6 and trying to make it look on IPADS and desktops with modern browsers. It just can't be done without it looking like crap or with limited functionality. I really feel sorry for professional web developers. YIKES!
So yes we care, and as a user, khallow you should too as IE 9 or later means you can enjoy HTML 5 content with Chrome or Firefox that looks as cool as it does on your iPhone. IE 8/7 is why the desktop is offering an inferior web experience. For flash to finally die and all of us use HTML 5, old IE must DIE!
... and with THunderbird USB 3 there are drivers not compatible with XP.
Infact icore7s run like dogs and are klunky under the ancient kernel. If you own an old pc fine, but it is silly to put XP on new hardware being purchased today. It is a security problem too. Any large organization that is not planning, or actively migrating to Windows 7 right now is incompetent.
XP does not support ASLR, DEP, and exception handling protection.
This means a buffer overlfow attack can occur because the hacker knows which memory addresses to feed malware code into that are active in XP. Windows 7 puts them in random locations making an attack harder. Bounds and exception handling is better too as if your code causes an exception you can redirect the browser to execute code elsewhere when it is thrown. IE 9 and Chrome have this but the kernel and apis in XP do not support it.
Infact Chrome runs in neutered mode with its sandbox just to remain compatible. Just like any older piece of equipment the maintance and setps like which you said add to the TCO of XP as well. It is an inappropriate OS to run unless its not networked in 2012.
Any large enterprise that has migrated always reports a drop in malware infections, Windows rot, and other problems. The TCO is much lower as yes Windows 7 has benefits over XP
Chrome and FF use these things too in Windows 7 but leave it crippled in XP for compatibility reasons. Chrome is more secure and this is why IE 9 will never come to XP. MS would have to disable half of the security features in order to get it to run.
XP is broken in 2012 and not an appropriate enterprise OS for internet enabled users.
Come on mods, he has a point if you check security vulnerabilities. XP is twice to three times as many security holes as Windows 7. Even on an alternative browser the sandboxing does not have DEP, ASLR, and exception handling as the ancient kernel can't support it. Chrome is more secure under Windows 7 and these capabilities are disabled for compatibility reasons.
He should not be modded down.
Security is a BIG REASON to upgrade. It is like keeping IE 6. It is insecure even with patches. XP is from the same era as IE 6
It enables LAWYERS to file Facebook for causes. Trust me they will anything if they can win some money in a settlement and a facebook logs gives them LOTS of information. It is a lawyers dream
And use VBScript with activeX controls mixed with sql server 6.0 and make sure the clients all have to use IE 6.
Throw a little ASP, not asp.net or anything bloated that checks the sql agaisnt injections and you will have one rock solid platform that nothing will get hacked or get intercepted.Just ask any MCSE to secure it and you are good to go
I am so sick and tired of the MS sucks bal bla, but Unix is infalliable that persists here.
The ones who say Linux never gets viruses always have rootkits on their servers because it is a dangerous assumption. MS is at least trying and has more security features of any operating system. So there are a few vulnerabilities. I am sure Gnome, X, and Linux have similiar ones as well.
Or need to use Chrome for apps and features that are not compatible with every other browser.
hmmm this sounds vaguely familiar. Like I remember a similiar time not too long ago.
6 months ago there was an HTML 5 demo that mysteriously only worked in Chrome advertised in slashdot. The trick most did not notice was it only worked in Chrome because it was HTML 5 based and had glue that was proprietary to Chrome.
We already went through this, and at work still are going through replacing IE 6 due to this sillyness. I do not want to be stuck in a similiar situation a decade from now you write for Chrome, and it then breaks in every other browser as you have to find some obscure AJAX api that mimicks NACL/Dart for a half assed experience for non Chrome users. Google would love this and be the king of their cloud based ecosystems and this is their plan.
This is relevent to Chrome being the next IE 6 of the 2010s in my opinion.
I keep trying to say the same thing yet get modded down to flamebait half the time.
NACL is the new platform of choice for Chrome OS. Those who say it is opensource do not get that is means applications written in Dart and not AJAX. Also IE 6's HTML and CSS 1 support was opensource and documented too. Look at all the IE 6 apps they can't be ported that still run today! It is a mess.
I know Google is cool and MS is bad on MS but Google has mentioned they plan to port Chrome to Andriod if Chrome OS fails and use that as the new platform. Metro at least is more Ajax and open sourced in Windows 8 than NACL/Dart/and other other proprietary technology. Even if the source code is available it violates the spirit of the web
No people didn't buy Macs because they cost $6,000 in today's dollars for the 1984 mac.
A commodore from that era was MUCH more economical. Rich business minded folks had IBM PCs at home as they were pricey but they got them because of work made them.
Ugly green monochrome graphics screamed professionalism and business while fonts and good graphics meant etcha-sketch to these idiots back then.
Most people did not use computers yet in the 1980s. Those who would prefer the mac simply did not own a computer yet and that was another factor.
They own the mainframe market. For some mission critical apps like the whole banking infrustructure at BOA, FAA traffic controlling, package shipping, massive payroll processing, IBM is innovating.
AS400 has uptimes that would clobber any Linux or Wintel based server.
IBM is making more money than ever in these enterprise markets.
I browse the web a lot with it. But I feel eventually there will be buffer overflow, flash, various vector attacks, that will compromise my phone.
It seems Andriod's java api is very very limited to internals which is bad as you can't make a shield like you can in Windows. Anyone have a suggestion?
HTML 5 support, a great gui, silverlight and netflix, Xbox live, Zune music, etc.
I am not an MS fanboi and own an Andriod that I am not too thrilled with due to the plan and outrageous price I paid. The reviews I have seen are mostly positive and it is not perfect, but it is a BIG improvement over WindowsCE. If you hate MS at least give them credit they are really trying with Windows Phone and IE 9 and the upcomming 10 to not suck.
The multitasking bit, was readded as WindowsCE had it but MS gutted so much out for Windows Phone 7. In many ways Windows Phone is NT as WindowsCE is 95. Too similiar but different models. As Windows 8 comes out and apps go Metro the value of a Windows phone will go up. But I agree there are rough spots for it from the reviews I read. The phone would be a great tool for business people. But the demos I have seen show it less mature as the Driods and IPhones and it will take a few years to catch up. Windows mobile really is a new platform here
Bitter from being laid off and humiliated by your former employer.
Being terminated is not fun and when it is not your fault it is infuriating. Since he is mentioning his dedication it shows that in his mind he gave everything to them and they still did not give a rats ass.
I would be upset too even if you are making twice as much now. It comes to show you can't trust your employers. Don't stay with a company because they treated you nice and gave you a career. Stay for a few years but look after the man in the mirror or your family. In the end you are only an expense and your employer can easily survive if you fell over dead tomorrow. Sad, but true.
Leaving its core strength's and biggest revenue generator is not a minor transgression. That would have been the worst business deciscion in history right up with IBM letting MS market DOS to competitors and creating the clone market.
It is funny because CEOs keep justifying outsourcing and doing things to harm employees as a fudiciary duty to the shareholders and how they need the board of directors needs, yet no one can fire the ones at HP. Believe me many hedge fund managers have tried but do not have the support of everyone including HPs own employees who have some shares.
But the move to fire him was so the board of directors could keep their jobs. I agree they should be fired. They selected Carly Fiona which in my opinion is one of the worst rockstar CEOs today. Is the current board of directors the original board?
If I were Icahn, I would view a nice hostile takeover of HP with a new board. The current CEO is doing the right things currently but it is too early to tell. She is the only ones with the brains that dictate that "Gee. Perhaps we should focus on HPs core strengths!" she is treating employees a lot better from what I read. But still she admits she is an outsider an Amazon.com is not a tech company. They are a distributer and retailer company. She would probably be a better CEO of Barnes & Noble than HP which is a different market. Again, the board failed to see that and it shows they have no clue what their own company even is. GOD.
It might recover but we will wait and see. If your own CEO does not even believe in the value of your own products or its employees it is time to bail out.
Facebook is in the marketing and social networking market. Not phone/tablet market.
If they did buy it then Google, Apple, and MS would compete with their own social platforms and ruin facebook. Windows 8 has tweet-orama and facebook applets in Metro. That would quickly change if MS viewed Facebook as a competitor.
Actually Palm is not that bad. Blackberry gave it a black eye, but tablets is where WebOS could have made a difference. WebOS was a great OS in 2009 and HP didn't want to let Apple and Google eat up the market leaving HP out of computing.
When Hurd left, the new CEO viewed it as a failure and never invested heavily into the product. He then went on and told customers, BestBuy, and suppliers he has no plans to sell it. Gee, that really makes me want to go out and buy one now. lol
So BestBuy got nervous and pulled the plug within 60 days of launch! UGH
Sunken costs are not popular at HP as witnessed with them killing the Alpha processor because they invested in Itanium, but the last CEO didn't care and made some enemies at the board of directors.
HP is a horribly managed company starting with Carly Fiona. When accountants run the company the value goes into the shithole and greed takes over. All the good employees leave and you have a company with accountants and no engineers left. Either HP is going to have to rebuff WebOS and beg BestBuy and Walmart for forgiveness, or sell it for pennies and accept the loss. That is a tough one for the CEO as the board of directors and shareholders will have a riot if they do not get every penny back! Ouch
These decisions were made by different CEOs. The last HP CEO wanted to turn HP into another SAP (his previous employer) and turn HP into a totally different company and sell its hardware division. He also decided to spread fud about webOS not being supported which made consumers not want to buy them as he wanted to leave the tablet market. The other CEO Hurd bought it.The board fired him within a week which was the right thing to do.
You can't just become something else unrelated as it has failed many many times if you study business cases.
The current CEO decided to do a risk analysis, and determined it was totally retarded and made no business sense to sell its hardware division. Unfortunately, she did not do an analysis with WebOS because HP laid off the whole staff from the last CEO.
What irks me is WebOS failed because of the last CEO, not because of the product itself. It was only on the market for what a month! Then HP told everyone they were selling it. Once that happened consumers stayed away from it. Then the CEO basically said, see they are staying away from it therefore it is a failure! bla.
I am agaisn't excessive CEO compensation, but a bad CEO can really fuck up a company and its product line as evident in HP. People always chose Windows over Linux, Mac, OS2, because they want to bet on the winner and not invest in a failed product. This sealed WebOS before people even knew what it was sadly. It was brand new to the tablet world when HP pulled the plug.
I forgot the lady's name but she seems to have more business sense than the last 3 CEOs. I would try to save WebOS, but it maybe too late. Development has stopped and Andriod and IOS are moving ahead and getting more and more updated. Even Windows Phone 7 which is behind is starting to catch up in capabilities to it.
What a mess and I am glad I am not the CEO of HP.... ok I would actually like to run it into the ground for a year and collect a golden parachute and become rich, but still besides the point.
Slashdot Mirror
Mod down
Fanboism wont work as evident by a biased link.
IE 9 is not perfect. It may not even have all of the bells and whistles of Chrome. But that doesn't mean it sucks. Infact it is a great modern browser in the same league as FF and Chrome. The trolling makes people like your employer more likely to stick with IE7/8 which is MUCH WORSE as they feel it is all bad anyway.
I am not an IE advocate by any sense of the means but I would be greatful if IE users finally kicked older IE 8 to the curb and migrated to IE 9 so we can have a more modern web that is not reserved for our phones only.
Mod parent up.
The trolls here are making a 8% slower benchmark make it look like IE 9 is somehow suckly like IE 6 or IE 7 that is 4000% slower than a modern browser.
IE 9 might not be perfect but it is in the same league as FF and Chrome and certainly not bad. If you are stuck at work, IE 9 is a great upgrade and is certainly tolerable.
IE 9 has a great javascript engine as evident by the sunspider benchmarks and OMG it fails Google's own benchmark but it is still 600% faster than IE 8 is rediculous.
Did you put a doctype in your code? Seriously that is fud.
As long as it is coded with a doctype it will function and render no different than any other browser.
FUD
Ask anyone who has used Opera from 2001 - 2002? IE 6 was a decent browser but had security issues you had to watch out for.
IE 6 is very old and the whole CSS box model was because the implementation was not invented yet and it was just a spec for CSS 1.
Keep in mind we are talking about browsers being written when president Clinton was in office and AOL was the most popular ISP. Infact some prefered AOL over the internet. This was how long ago old Opera and IE 6 were. Trying to get Ajax to work today is why IE 6 appears so chaotic. It simply was not designed for it or it will work poorly.
Because some people wont ever leave IE. Companies and inviduals who first started using the internet with IE 6. We are geeks and most of us started using computers in the 1990s or even 1980s or earlier. Most average people started in the late 1990s so XP/ME with IE is all they know.
If IE acts like Chrome or Firefox then why should we care? IE 10 will rival Chrome with HTML 5 features and probably the most conformant bugfree javascript available with full hardware acceleration. It will be a competitve browser.
I am trying to start an e-Commerce business and I discovered the horror of coding to IE 6 and trying to make it look on IPADS and desktops with modern browsers. It just can't be done without it looking like crap or with limited functionality. I really feel sorry for professional web developers. YIKES!
So yes we care, and as a user, khallow you should too as IE 9 or later means you can enjoy HTML 5 content with Chrome or Firefox that looks as cool as it does on your iPhone. IE 8/7 is why the desktop is offering an inferior web experience. For flash to finally die and all of us use HTML 5, old IE must DIE!
... and with THunderbird USB 3 there are drivers not compatible with XP.
Infact icore7s run like dogs and are klunky under the ancient kernel. If you own an old pc fine, but it is silly to put XP on new hardware being purchased today. It is a security problem too. Any large organization that is not planning, or actively migrating to Windows 7 right now is incompetent.
XP does not support ASLR, DEP, and exception handling protection.
This means a buffer overlfow attack can occur because the hacker knows which memory addresses to feed malware code into that are active in XP. Windows 7 puts them in random locations making an attack harder. Bounds and exception handling is better too as if your code causes an exception you can redirect the browser to execute code elsewhere when it is thrown. IE 9 and Chrome have this but the kernel and apis in XP do not support it.
Infact Chrome runs in neutered mode with its sandbox just to remain compatible. Just like any older piece of equipment the maintance and setps like which you said add to the TCO of XP as well. It is an inappropriate OS to run unless its not networked in 2012.
Any large enterprise that has migrated always reports a drop in malware infections, Windows rot, and other problems. The TCO is much lower as yes Windows 7 has benefits over XP
Chrome and FF use these things too in Windows 7 but leave it crippled in XP for compatibility reasons. Chrome is more secure and this is why IE 9 will never come to XP. MS would have to disable half of the security features in order to get it to run.
XP is broken in 2012 and not an appropriate enterprise OS for internet enabled users.
Mod parent up.
Come on mods, he has a point if you check security vulnerabilities. XP is twice to three times as many security holes as Windows 7. Even on an alternative browser the sandboxing does not have DEP, ASLR, and exception handling as the ancient kernel can't support it. Chrome is more secure under Windows 7 and these capabilities are disabled for compatibility reasons.
He should not be modded down.
Security is a BIG REASON to upgrade. It is like keeping IE 6. It is insecure even with patches. XP is from the same era as IE 6
/dev/null webscales!!!
I read it as this.
It enables LAWYERS to file Facebook for causes. Trust me they will anything if they can win some money in a settlement and a facebook logs gives them LOTS of information. It is a lawyers dream
And use VBScript with activeX controls mixed with sql server 6.0 and make sure the clients all have to use IE 6.
Throw a little ASP, not asp.net or anything bloated that checks the sql agaisnt injections and you will have one rock solid platform that nothing will get hacked or get intercepted.Just ask any MCSE to secure it and you are good to go
Mod up!
I am so sick and tired of the MS sucks bal bla, but Unix is infalliable that persists here.
The ones who say Linux never gets viruses always have rootkits on their servers because it is a dangerous assumption. MS is at least trying and has more security features of any operating system. So there are a few vulnerabilities. I am sure Gnome, X, and Linux have similiar ones as well.
Or need to use Chrome for apps and features that are not compatible with every other browser.
hmmm this sounds vaguely familiar. Like I remember a similiar time not too long ago.
6 months ago there was an HTML 5 demo that mysteriously only worked in Chrome advertised in slashdot. The trick most did not notice was it only worked in Chrome because it was HTML 5 based and had glue that was proprietary to Chrome.
We already went through this, and at work still are going through replacing IE 6 due to this sillyness. I do not want to be stuck in a similiar situation a decade from now you write for Chrome, and it then breaks in every other browser as you have to find some obscure AJAX api that mimicks NACL/Dart for a half assed experience for non Chrome users. Google would love this and be the king of their cloud based ecosystems and this is their plan.
This is relevent to Chrome being the next IE 6 of the 2010s in my opinion.
I keep trying to say the same thing yet get modded down to flamebait half the time.
NACL is the new platform of choice for Chrome OS. Those who say it is opensource do not get that is means applications written in Dart and not AJAX. Also IE 6's HTML and CSS 1 support was opensource and documented too. Look at all the IE 6 apps they can't be ported that still run today! It is a mess.
I know Google is cool and MS is bad on MS but Google has mentioned they plan to port Chrome to Andriod if Chrome OS fails and use that as the new platform. Metro at least is more Ajax and open sourced in Windows 8 than NACL/Dart/and other other proprietary technology. Even if the source code is available it violates the spirit of the web
No people didn't buy Macs because they cost $6,000 in today's dollars for the 1984 mac.
A commodore from that era was MUCH more economical. Rich business minded folks had IBM PCs at home as they were pricey but they got them because of work made them.
Ugly green monochrome graphics screamed professionalism and business while fonts and good graphics meant etcha-sketch to these idiots back then.
Most people did not use computers yet in the 1980s. Those who would prefer the mac simply did not own a computer yet and that was another factor.
They own the mainframe market. For some mission critical apps like the whole banking infrustructure at BOA, FAA traffic controlling, package shipping, massive payroll processing, IBM is innovating.
AS400 has uptimes that would clobber any Linux or Wintel based server.
IBM is making more money than ever in these enterprise markets.
I browse the web a lot with it. But I feel eventually there will be buffer overflow, flash, various vector attacks, that will compromise my phone.
It seems Andriod's java api is very very limited to internals which is bad as you can't make a shield like you can in Windows. Anyone have a suggestion?
HTML 5 support, a great gui, silverlight and netflix, Xbox live, Zune music, etc.
I am not an MS fanboi and own an Andriod that I am not too thrilled with due to the plan and outrageous price I paid. The reviews I have seen are mostly positive and it is not perfect, but it is a BIG improvement over WindowsCE. If you hate MS at least give them credit they are really trying with Windows Phone and IE 9 and the upcomming 10 to not suck.
The multitasking bit, was readded as WindowsCE had it but MS gutted so much out for Windows Phone 7. In many ways Windows Phone is NT as WindowsCE is 95. Too similiar but different models. As Windows 8 comes out and apps go Metro the value of a Windows phone will go up. But I agree there are rough spots for it from the reviews I read. The phone would be a great tool for business people. But the demos I have seen show it less mature as the Driods and IPhones and it will take a few years to catch up. Windows mobile really is a new platform here
Bitter from being laid off and humiliated by your former employer.
Being terminated is not fun and when it is not your fault it is infuriating. Since he is mentioning his dedication it shows that in his mind he gave everything to them and they still did not give a rats ass.
I would be upset too even if you are making twice as much now. It comes to show you can't trust your employers. Don't stay with a company because they treated you nice and gave you a career. Stay for a few years but look after the man in the mirror or your family. In the end you are only an expense and your employer can easily survive if you fell over dead tomorrow. Sad, but true.
Leaving its core strength's and biggest revenue generator is not a minor transgression. That would have been the worst business deciscion in history right up with IBM letting MS market DOS to competitors and creating the clone market.
It is funny because CEOs keep justifying outsourcing and doing things to harm employees as a fudiciary duty to the shareholders and how they need the board of directors needs, yet no one can fire the ones at HP. Believe me many hedge fund managers have tried but do not have the support of everyone including HPs own employees who have some shares.
But the move to fire him was so the board of directors could keep their jobs. I agree they should be fired. They selected Carly Fiona which in my opinion is one of the worst rockstar CEOs today. Is the current board of directors the original board?
If I were Icahn, I would view a nice hostile takeover of HP with a new board. The current CEO is doing the right things currently but it is too early to tell. She is the only ones with the brains that dictate that "Gee. Perhaps we should focus on HPs core strengths!" she is treating employees a lot better from what I read. But still she admits she is an outsider an Amazon.com is not a tech company. They are a distributer and retailer company. She would probably be a better CEO of Barnes & Noble than HP which is a different market. Again, the board failed to see that and it shows they have no clue what their own company even is. GOD.
It might recover but we will wait and see. If your own CEO does not even believe in the value of your own products or its employees it is time to bail out.
Facebook is in the marketing and social networking market. Not phone/tablet market.
If they did buy it then Google, Apple, and MS would compete with their own social platforms and ruin facebook. Windows 8 has tweet-orama and facebook applets in Metro. That would quickly change if MS viewed Facebook as a competitor.
A very dumb move to buy them out indeed.
Windows phone 7 mango can and is a decent OS. Windows 8 and Windows 8 phone will be there by the time they make a webOS product.
Actually Palm is not that bad. Blackberry gave it a black eye, but tablets is where WebOS could have made a difference. WebOS was a great OS in 2009 and HP didn't want to let Apple and Google eat up the market leaving HP out of computing.
When Hurd left, the new CEO viewed it as a failure and never invested heavily into the product. He then went on and told customers, BestBuy, and suppliers he has no plans to sell it. Gee, that really makes me want to go out and buy one now. lol
So BestBuy got nervous and pulled the plug within 60 days of launch! UGH
Sunken costs are not popular at HP as witnessed with them killing the Alpha processor because they invested in Itanium, but the last CEO didn't care and made some enemies at the board of directors.
HP is a horribly managed company starting with Carly Fiona. When accountants run the company the value goes into the shithole and greed takes over. All the good employees leave and you have a company with accountants and no engineers left. Either HP is going to have to rebuff WebOS and beg BestBuy and Walmart for forgiveness, or sell it for pennies and accept the loss. That is a tough one for the CEO as the board of directors and shareholders will have a riot if they do not get every penny back! Ouch
These decisions were made by different CEOs. The last HP CEO wanted to turn HP into another SAP (his previous employer) and turn HP into a totally different company and sell its hardware division. He also decided to spread fud about webOS not being supported which made consumers not want to buy them as he wanted to leave the tablet market. The other CEO Hurd bought it.The board fired him within a week which was the right thing to do.
You can't just become something else unrelated as it has failed many many times if you study business cases.
The current CEO decided to do a risk analysis, and determined it was totally retarded and made no business sense to sell its hardware division. Unfortunately, she did not do an analysis with WebOS because HP laid off the whole staff from the last CEO.
What irks me is WebOS failed because of the last CEO, not because of the product itself. It was only on the market for what a month! Then HP told everyone they were selling it. Once that happened consumers stayed away from it. Then the CEO basically said, see they are staying away from it therefore it is a failure! bla.
I am agaisn't excessive CEO compensation, but a bad CEO can really fuck up a company and its product line as evident in HP. People always chose Windows over Linux, Mac, OS2, because they want to bet on the winner and not invest in a failed product. This sealed WebOS before people even knew what it was sadly. It was brand new to the tablet world when HP pulled the plug.
I forgot the lady's name but she seems to have more business sense than the last 3 CEOs. I would try to save WebOS, but it maybe too late. Development has stopped and Andriod and IOS are moving ahead and getting more and more updated. Even Windows Phone 7 which is behind is starting to catch up in capabilities to it.
What a mess and I am glad I am not the CEO of HP. ... ok I would actually like to run it into the ground for a year and collect a golden parachute and become rich, but still besides the point.