Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Palm Kills Community Before It Begins

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 5 years ago | from the almost-like-they-don't-need-people-to-buy-their-stuff dept.

Communications 247

Former Fan of Palm writes to tell us that an enthusiastic, supportive developer community has fallen victim to corporate ineptitude once again. The preDevCamp started as a community-driven effort designed to mirror the iPhoneDevCamp based on the new "Pre" product announced by Palm. Unfortunately, suspicion and legal posturing seems to have gutted the founders of any and all enthusiasm they may have once had. When will corporations realize that community support is the best way to drive success? "As a corporation, I acknowledge that Palm's only responsibility is to its shareholders. There's nothing self serving or evil about that; it's how things work in big business. However there are many keen and willing developers out there, who have been waiting for the arrival of WebOS. A development platform is only a success if it is broadly adopted. Instead of embracing the grassroots upswell of interest in WebOS that preDevCamp fostered, Palm seem to be, at best, oblivious and, at worst, disdainful of the enthusiasm and good will engendered by these folk. I think they are missing a real opportunity to be involved in and to help generate the growth of a vital community."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Hah! (3, Interesting)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 5 years ago | (#28056897)

Well, this is certainly an interesting article to be reading as I am looking for a replacement for my aging Tungsten E.

Guess who I probably won't be going with this time?!

Re:Hah! (5, Informative)

bigman2003 (671309) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057093)

Windows Mobile?

When it comes down to it...like it or not...Windows Mobile is the most open phone OS.

They are the most supportive for developers. No roadblocks, nothing. I can write a program today, and distribute it over the web without any problems.

Every part of the Phone OS is open to me. My carrier cannot block a single thing from running on my phone.

Re:Hah! (1)

bigman2003 (671309) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057135)

Just a little more-

Windows Mobile 6.5 has been widely available for a while, and Microsoft hasn't raised a fuss. Apps were ripped from it (Facebook for instance) to run on previous versions...and Microsoft actually supported it!

Re:Hah! (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28057153)

bullshit.
android followed closely by symbian OS is the most open there is.
carriers regularly block GPS capability on windows mobile phones.

Re:Hah! (2, Informative)

bigman2003 (671309) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057195)

Honestly...I completely forgot about Android.

But I have had quite a bit of trouble with Symbian, much less so with Windows Mobile.

Re:Hah! (5, Funny)

crabboy.com (771982) | more than 5 years ago | (#28058001)

Honestly...I completely forgot about Android.

.

It takes a big man to admit his mistake.

Re:Hah! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28057997)

Blocking GPS has nothing to do with the operating system, they just don't provide drivers. If I gave you the world's fastest most super duper video card and you couldn't use it in Windows, its not the fault of Windows, its because I didn't give you drivers.

Re:Hah! (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28058161)

Symbian is trying to become open due to competition (a year ago, the pro version of Carbide would cost you more than $1000 - just to get the ability to debug on the phone), yet there is still all that signature crap. Moreover, have you tried programming for Symbian? I wouldn't call the experience pleasant (plus every major OS version tends to be incompatible with the previous, I need a SIGNIFICANTLY different codebase to run on OS 9 devices than for the OS 8 devices).

Re:Hah! (3, Informative)

Maarek Stele (7770) | more than 5 years ago | (#28058169)

bullshit.
android followed closely by symbian OS is the most open there is.
carriers regularly block GPS capability on windows mobile phones.

that's carrier specific, like Verizon. You can use everything in AT&T so I don't have a problem either with creating apps.

Re:Hah! (3, Funny)

rolfwind (528248) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057287)

When it comes down to it...like it or not...Windows Mobile is the most open phone OS.

If, by open, do you mean in the same fashion as goatse? If it's anything like it's parent OS, I'll have to agree;)

And yet.. (3, Interesting)

msimm (580077) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057499)

The OS still sucks. I'll stick with RIM/Blackberry (which also has an active and seemingly open developer community) until a Android phone I like comes along.

And where do you get "most open phone OS"?

Re:And yet.. (4, Insightful)

blincoln (592401) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057817)

I'll stick with RIM/Blackberry (which also has an active and seemingly open developer community) until a Android phone I like comes along.

Are you posting from the mirror universe? When I had a company-provided BlackBerry, I went looking for apps. The only "free" one I found was Opera Mini, AKA Opera Please-Trust-Us-Not-To-Steal-All-Your-Personal-Data-That-Is-Being-Proxied-And-Modified-By-Our Servers-Including-HTTPS-Traffic. I tried out a couple of shareware/paid apps and was amazingly unimpressed. One was a replacement browser which managed to be even less usable than RIM's, and the other was a server-based wrapper for MS Office/OpenOffice that would take screenshots of Office docs and make them available for the phone so they'd look correct, because RIM's viewer/editor programs were so lacking in features.
On the other hand, now that I have a G1, I've found a ton of useful, completely free applications. It doesn't have Exchange ActiveSync (yet), but since it's my personal phone I'm not in a huge hurry to get that anyway. Also, it has a browser that actually works.
If there's a whole world of BlackBerry stuff I missed, I'd definitely be interested in hearing about it, though.

Re:And yet.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28057971)

A whole world of BlackBerry stuff indeed. A whole world of applications. An "app world", if you will.

http://appworld.blackberry.com/ [blackberry.com]

Re:Hah! (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057627)

Yet.

Microsoft is working hard to make a iPhone app model that they can get their cut of each app.

It's open now, it will NOT be in 2 years. They cant ignore the big fat gigantic cash cow that Apple created by locking down the apps like they have.

Re:Hah! (2, Interesting)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057665)

For now.
I wonder how long that will last. Microsoft copies all things Apple. My bet it will be just a matter of time before it puts in an AppStore and locks things down.
Microsoft has never seen a revenue stream it didn't love.

Re:Hah! (1)

tcolberg (998885) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057235)

I'm also waiting for a replacement for my Tungsten T3 which practically crippled. A lot of Palm's success in the past was due to the app community, so I'm hoping that they will leverage that with the Pre. If this doesn't cover what I'm looking for, I might have to move on to Android.

Re:Hah! (5, Insightful)

COMON$ (806135) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057247)

Palm, while once a great device is just another example of a corporation who should have been unstoppable, makes a crapload of stupid mistakes, doesn't learn from them, then keeps hoping that their lack of innovation will drive them forward. iPod, iPhone, RIM, and the slew of windows devices should never have had a chance if Palm would have been at least a little adventurous.

Re:Hah! (1, Interesting)

ViennaSt (1138481) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057537)

What's worse...if you look up on Palm's career page and do a keyword search for "developer" jobs or "WebOS" jobs...

http://www.palm.com/us/company/careers.html [palm.com]

There are zero job openings anywhere in the US. Looks like they don't want/need any help developing their products, grassroots or in their company.

Re:Hah! (3, Insightful)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057787)

Just look at what they did with the Treo. Rather than holding on to their strengths (handwriting, high-resolution screen, existing apps) and just adding a phone, they threw all those things away in order to try to compete with Blackberry and Nokia: They made the screen smaller, added that shitty little chiclet keyboard, removed the handwriting recognition, and a lot of existing apps would not work (or work well anyway) on the Treo.

What a tragedy. The iPhone is what the Palm should have been 4 or even 5 years ago.

Re:Hah! (1)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057485)

Guess who I probably won't be going with this time?!

A corporation that manufactures and sells anything? Because most of them would have done the same. Especially the one Palm is competing with.

Re:Hah! (4, Informative)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057619)

Why?
Really all that happened is these guys talked to Palm about setting this up, signed and NDA, got a meeting set up, then some yo yo tweeted about it and probably violated the NDA.
So the meeting got canceled.
No take down notice or anything like that. Now they are all upset and posting about how unfair this is and Slashdot picks it up and runs with it.
Well just what are you going to replace your Tungsten E with then?
Windows Mobil, iPhone, S60 maybe?
Good grief folks get some perspective. Palm my end up sucking but the Pre may be great. Seems way out of line to get bent before the phone is even out yet.

Huh Huh (1)

BUTT-H34D (840273) | more than 5 years ago | (#28056953)

PALM. heh heh.

Well to be honest... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28056971)

I'm not sure Palm would want an IPhoneDevCamp-like group. Aren't those the guys that led the development of jailbreaks? Seems like a situation Palm wouldn't want to be in. Especially since the Pre is a survive-or-die product.

Re:Well to be honest... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28057541)

Aren't those the guys that led the development of jailbreaks? Seems like a situation Palm wouldn't want to be in.

Ever consider how many people would have not bought an iPhone if it was 100% impossible to "jailbreak"?

Re:Well to be honest... (2, Insightful)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#28058103)

Ever consider how many people would have not bought an iPhone if it was 100% impossible to "jailbreak"?

Ever consider how many people have not bought an iPhone simply because for it be useful, they would have to "jailbreak" it?

contrary (2, Informative)

b4upoo (166390) | more than 5 years ago | (#28056983)

"There is nothing self serving---only responsibility to its share holders".
        What a contradiction. Right action demands serving all people and the most in need first not shareholders. In plain terms a corporation is about the essence of pure evil.

Re:contrary (5, Insightful)

mea37 (1201159) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057063)

So by way of example, whenever you earn money you keep just enough to live and give the rest to local charity?

Oh, but you clearly have access to a computer, so that's probably not true.

Get off your high horse about "right action". Hypocrisy is the essence of pure evil.

Re:contrary (1)

kestasjk (933987) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057399)

Hypocrisy is the essence of pure evil.

Overreaction is the essence of pure evil.

Re:contrary (4, Funny)

camperdave (969942) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057529)

Hypocrisy is the essence of pure evil.
Overreaction is the essence of pure evil.

No. Describing things as the essence of pure evil is the essence of pure evil.

Re:contrary (4, Funny)

cromar (1103585) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057661)

Recursion is the essence of pure evil.

Re:contrary (2, Funny)

LoyalOpposition (168041) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057881)

No, recursion is the recursion.

Re:contrary (1)

Unordained (262962) | more than 5 years ago | (#28058141)

Is recursion tautology, or is tautology recursion? Is a stateless, parameter-less, unbounded recursion even recursion at all?

Re:contrary (2, Funny)

Chris Mattern (191822) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057925)

Recursion is recursion (see: Recursion).

Re:contrary (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28057931)

No. Forgetting to close your tags properly is the essence of pure evil.

Re:contrary (1)

mea37 (1201159) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057703)

Hm... did you miss the reason I chose that phrasing? Because missing the joke is the essence of pure evil.

Also, just to get ahead of this one: suggesting that my actions are evil, is the essence of pure evil.

Re:contrary (1)

MikeBabcock (65886) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057905)

A lot of us do in fact give a good portion of our money to charity. People who make a lot of money often give a very large amount to charity. Sure they also live well, but its not like they all penny pinch every dollar for themselves.

Re:contrary (2, Insightful)

John Whitley (6067) | more than 5 years ago | (#28058013)

No, one doesn't need to be utterly self-denying. GP's statement was phased differently by Bill and Ted: "Be excellent to each other." A Slashdotter, however, might require the double-negative form: "don't be an asshat." ;-) Neither of these forms include "to the exclusion of oneself."

Paying attention to one's own needs is basic to the ability to interact with the world in a healthy way. People (and corporations) who deny this tend to get rather screwed up and/or end up playing doormat to others' desires.

In the case of corporations, they DO have a responsibility to the societies that permit them to exist beyond just "the shareholders." This is a stupid fallacy that I'd love to see die. Occasionally, corporations forget this and get smacked down for it -- see the history of laws and legal actions relating to pollution, lemon laws, anti-trust, etc.

Hypocrisy is the essence of pure evil.

No, hyperbole is. ;-)

Re:contrary (4, Informative)

MozeeToby (1163751) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057105)

Right action demands serving all people and the most in need first not shareholders. In plain terms a corporation is about the essence of pure evil.

By that logic, if I don't live in a shack and give away all the money I don't absolutely need, I must be an evil, immoral person. Right and wrong are determined by culture and society. In our culture, a business has a duty to maximize shareholder value because shareholders have essentially loaned the corporation the money it needs to operate. If I loan you money, it is correct in our society to pay it back with agreed upon interest; there's very little difference between that and a corporation maximizing shareholder value.

Re:contrary (4, Insightful)

gravesb (967413) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057261)

Bond holders lend money to a company; shareholders own part of the company. Since the shareholders own the company, the board and CEO work for the shareholders. That is why they must maximize shareholder value. Then the shareholders can take the money they make and spend it how they like. Saying a corporation is evil is a silly, populist gloss over the way things work. Corporations are neither good nor evil. The people who own them are. Corporations maximize shareholder value, and then we, as shareholders, determine whether that value is used for good or for evil. Sorry- not all of that was directed at you, just the definitional part at the beginning.

Re:Maximizing short term or long term profits (5, Insightful)

vertinox (846076) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057729)

Corporations maximize shareholder value, and then we, as shareholders, determine whether that value is used for good or for evil. Sorry- not all of that was directed at you, just the definitional part at the beginning.

I think a lot of companies fail to realize that short term profit maximization often is contrary to long term profit maximization.

Sure, they could make a lot more money being bastards to their community and suing their customers and competitors, but over long term they will loose "good will" and suffer long term profits.

Personally, I'd rather own shares in a company that treats its employees, customers, and community with respect simply because that will mean they'll be around in 20 years with maximized gains.

Re:Maximizing short term or long term profits (3, Insightful)

gravesb (967413) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057895)

Very true, and I wish more large shareholders--pension plans, for example--would do so. The problem is when a majority shareholder wants a large, short term profit and pressures the company to maximize short term value. The board can hide behind the business judgement rule, but then the shareholder will replace them with someone who will maximize profits in the short term.

Re:contrary (1)

mcsqueak (1043736) | more than 5 years ago | (#28058177)

THANK YOU for stating this, even though you shouldn't have to. If I have to listen to one more person automatically paint corporations as "bad" because they think it makes them sound intellectual I'm going to puke. And don't get me started on those douches with their Che stickers on their Macbooks... ugh! ;)

Re:contrary (2, Informative)

vertinox (846076) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057477)

By that logic, if I don't live in a shack and give away all the money I don't absolutely need, I must be an evil, immoral person.

According to a lot of regions... Including Christianity.

Yes, you are.

"Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to squeeze through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to get into the kingdom of God."
>

I'll admit. I'm not a Christian (and yet I'm here quoting bible verses) so I understand perhaps this view is flawed, but arguably if you take it from a religious point of view of Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism then yes you are supposed to give all your things away you don't need a live in a shack.

Heck, Islam forbids money lending and so did Christianity up until recently.

Not that people have overlooked these teachings for the past 2000 or so odd years, but don't say wealth isn't historically viewed as something not evil. Half of the new testament is Jesus's denouncification of it.

Again, I don't personally ascribe to it, but the tell that to the Amish or Buddhist monks.

Re:contrary (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057725)

I guess in the eyes of religion, then, all technology is really quite evil too. After all, without wealth, no one would ever have been able to devote the time, energy, and resources necessary to developing any but the most rudimentary of technologies. Things like scientific research must be evil, because these scientists are being funded by wealthy people to pursue things, instead of this money being used to feed the poor.

No wonder I'm not religious. It's all a bunch of idiotic claptrap made up by people envious of others.

Re:contrary (2, Interesting)

vertinox (846076) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057957)

After all, without wealth, no one would ever have been able to devote the time, energy, and resources necessary to developing any but the most rudimentary of technologies.

Umm... Who is your history teacher so I can slap them because you've just discounted all the Greek, Roman, and Renaissance innovators and inventors? Yes, many of them had patrons, but most of these guys weren't wealthy themselves. (And ironically some of the Scientists during the 1500's were monks and church leaders themselves)

Also you've discounted all the advances of the Soviet Space program and arguably the Nazi German rocket program.

I will agree that wealth is conductive towards technological progress, but capitalism wasn't needed for all instances of progress.

I'd argue with need a mix of both, because without agencies like DARPA we'd never have saw private industry take the ball and run with what we call the internet today.

Re:contrary (2, Informative)

XxtraLarGe (551297) | more than 5 years ago | (#28058085)

I'll admit. I'm not a Christian (and yet I'm here quoting bible verses) so I understand perhaps this view is flawed, but arguably if you take it from a religious point of view of Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism then yes you are supposed to give all your things away you don't need a live in a shack.

You can't just take one verse from the Bible and get a whole lot of meaning out of it. You have to look at it in context. Jesus often times did things to make a point, and this is one of those cases.

Prior to this passage (I'm paraphrasing now), a man asked Jesus what he had to do to get eternal life. Jesus told him to follow God's commandments, which the man claimed he did since he was a child. Jesus told him "Cool, now go sell all your stuff, give the money to the poor, and follow me." When Jesus said that, the man went away sad, because he was very wealthy. Basically, what it came down to was that the young man loved his stuff more than he loved God. That amounts to idolatry, which is in direct conflict with the 1st commandment.

Most people don't realize that Jesus talked about money more than almost any other subject. Obviously, Jesus had many people who had money that supported his ministry on Earth. From a Christian world view, there's nothing wrong with having stuff, there's just something wrong with loving stuff more than you love God.

Re:contrary (1)

fibrewire (1132953) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057747)

And by that logic, Walmart must be the poorest company ever, with their cheap prices, their welfare plans and low dollar salaries to their employees - yep, gotta maximize that shareholder value. MozeeToby is correct, but lets not forget that balance in a competitive marketplace is always key. If you can't come up with something new, copy something that works - like Walmart. Low ball the employees, they will be grateful to have the job. Low ball the price for goods, we will be grateful to save money. When you have billions of shares. In fact, every company in the forbes top 10 list has made their fortunes a couple of dollars at a time.

Note to self: Approach corporate Walmart with plan to distribute open source software and have local community devs at local stores, then host data warehouses at every store with free developer business centers - and cover all software and technology under the Walmart Public License.

Re:contrary (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28057229)

Wow. I thoroughly despise you with every cell of my body. You are the most disgusting person I've ever seen post on here.

Right action? (1)

Burning1 (204959) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057289)

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need", eh?

I have concerns about libertarian "free market" ideals, but I think your comment pushes things way too far in the opposite direction.

Re:Right action? (4, Insightful)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057985)

Please keep in mind that contrary to popular belief, Libertarians are not in favor of completely unregulated markets. Rather, they support the least amount of regulation that works. For example, I think just about anybody today with half a brain or more recognizes that the "financial industry" was out of control and requires more regulation... Libertarian or not. Most intelligent Libertarians also recognize that a reasonable set of antitrust laws are also necessary.

Re:contrary (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28057379)

What a stupid, ill-informed, and shallow comment.

Re:contrary (1, Troll)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057435)

Well, if Palm doesn't want a healthy development community for its products, then let them have what they want. It's the first nail in the coffin, and the product will be DOA. Fuck 'em.

Re:contrary (1)

sherriw (794536) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057441)

I wonder if anyone will catch your Eightfold Path reference. Great post.

Re:contrary (2, Funny)

NotQuiteReal (608241) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057457)

In plain terms a corporation is about the essence of pure evil.

Especially those 501(c)(3) corporations. Rotten to the core, every one of them!

Re:contrary (1)

ADRA (37398) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057751)

haha just watch "The Corporation". It was a great movie, even if you love our corporate overlords =)

Re:contrary (1)

crabboy.com (771982) | more than 5 years ago | (#28058059)

"There is nothing self serving---only responsibility to its share holders". What a contradiction. Right action demands serving all people and the most in need first not shareholders. In plain terms a corporation is about the essence of pure evil.

I believe you are both mistaken. A corporation has responsibility to provide value to all its STAKEholders. Meaning everyone with a stake of some sort in the company. Share holders being just one.

Nitwits (5, Informative)

jonnythan (79727) | more than 5 years ago | (#28056997)

If I'm reading correctly, Palm hasn't done anything.

It seems they signed some NDAs and had a meeting set up. Then one of the guys posted to Twtiter something about the meeting, and as a result Palm canceled the meeting.

That's it.

Am I missing something? If not, these guys are tards and making a big deal out of nothing.

Re:Nitwits (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28057189)

these guys are tards and making a big deal out of nothing.

I think this part needs to be emphasized and repeated.

Re:Nitwits (4, Insightful)

DerekLyons (302214) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057233)

Well, it also appears that the balance of their complaint is "we just wanna help and Palm hasn't fallen all over itself to appease us like they must".

Re:Nitwits (3, Interesting)

TinBromide (921574) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057295)

Haha, so the proper title is "overzealous developers get miffed at palm and lose interest in creating community".

Re:Nitwits (2, Insightful)

vertinox (846076) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057303)

Then one of the guys posted to Twtiter something about the meeting, and as a result Palm canceled the meeting.

All the guy said in Twitter that they were having a meeting with Palm and nothing content related to what they were discussing.

If that is the reason, then its piss poor community relations. If they guy gave details about what was covered then perhaps that would violate NDA.

Either way, the behavior of Palm towards its community developers isn't going to get anyone to do them any favors at this point.

Re:Nitwits (5, Insightful)

NiteMair (309303) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057387)

I'm guessing you've never read an NDA from a large corporation. Just the act of mentioning the NDA is often a violation of it - let alone that you are scheduled to meet with them!

The idiots who think they can re-interpret what an NDA means get what they deserve.

Re:Nitwits (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28057761)

First rule of NDA: Don't talk about NDA

Re:Nitwits (1)

644bd346996 (1012333) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057833)

Draconian NDAs like this one are usually laden with unconscionable terms, and are the most common symptom of bad community/developer relations. Once the public knows your product is coming, you want third party developers to be able to start working as soon as possible, and you want them to be able to publicly extol the benefits of developing for that platform.

Re:Nitwits (1)

gmeb (17697) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057965)

I agree. Corporations will only partner with entities/communities they trust. Not honouring an NDA is throwing away your trustworthiness. No corporation in their right mind will ever want to divulge confidential information with them.

Re:Nitwits (5, Insightful)

jonnythan (79727) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057459)

Well, the very existence of the meeting may have been covered by the NDA.

But the contract they signed with these guys was based on no business partnership whatsoever. Palm would have to basically just trust them to abide by the NDA.

The fact that they twittered about the meeting right after they signed the NDA probably didn't really foster trust in the relationship.

Re:Nitwits (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057901)

If they guy gave details about what was covered then perhaps that would violate NDA.

Simply disclosing the meeting could very well violate the NDA. It depends on exactly what the NDA required you to not disclose.

Re:Nitwits (1)

rm999 (775449) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057869)

It seems to me like this is one of those situations where someone's feelings got hurt, and they are trying to use the internet to punish the other side. I hate when people do this; if you think you were wronged, act like an adult. From the twitter posts, it seems like Palm's Ambassador is a normal guy who was a bit stressed, and felt he was being pestered. The Pre Dev Camp people should have remained consistent:
"During the planning phases of the event we agreed that the community would live and thrive with or without Palm, Inc.'s support or participation. To that end, we assumed we'd get no support from Palm"

Umm... (1)

Joe Snipe (224958) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057009)

There's nothing self serving or evil about that; it's how things work in big business.

There are people who feel that those two positions are not mutually exclusive.

Re:Umm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28057067)

Anyone who thinks businesses are about making profit, and have no care about anything else are commies!

Everyone know that businesses are like puppies, they make everyone happy and healthy and do no wrong!

Sorry... but gotta be said. (0, Funny)

zonker (1158) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057023)

FACE PALM.

Ok, what is the history from the other side? (1)

Tei (520358) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057039)

I feel like we are reading here only the 50% of the history.

So they cancelled a meeting? (2, Insightful)

Planesdragon (210349) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057041)

Ok. So some guys who don't have experience with WebOS want to do a "dev camp". OK, more power to them. Palm reaches out, wanting to encourage this sort of thing.

The blogger in the linked article then gets an NDA to sign for an upcoming meeting. And then the meeting is canceled... and because they canceled one meeting, obviously palm is "killing" a development community?

I wonder if Mr. "dancrumb" (Dan Crumb?) was just harping about the HTML + javascript model not being "real" programming, and the OS guys over at Palm realized that a community that didn't want to , you know, write web-style-apps for WebOS wasn't the first developer community they wanted to help?

Wasn't even the meeting.... (5, Insightful)

Cheviot (248921) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057045)

I might be missing something, but the fact that they were even having a meeting with Palm would have been covered by the NDA, wouldn't it?

If they started talking before even the first meeting took place it's not surprising Palm pulled the plug.

Quiet, you! (1)

bonch (38532) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057177)

Be quiet! Companies are evil! This is yet another example of "corporate ineptitude" for all the enlightened Slashdotters to shake their heads over. Didn't you read the summary? Stop thinking!

Read the article (5, Insightful)

NiteMair (309303) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057049)

It seems like these guys got overzealous that they had signed an NDA and were to meet with Palm, so much so that they couldn't refrain from posting a tweet about it.

It's likely that one of the conditions of the NDA was that they could not discuss the NDA at all. By claiming they had signed one, in preparation for a meeting with Palm, it was probably a sign that they couldn't keep their enthusiasm contained long enough to even meet with Palm.

This is speculation on my part, but this is how it seems reading the article. When dealing with corporations and NDAs, one must be careful what one does - the old adage: "loose lips sinks ships" comes to mind.

Re:Read the article (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 5 years ago | (#28058083)

"The first rule of Fight Club is, you do not talk about Fight Club." Somehow, I don't think this applies to NDAs.

Overreacting. (1)

damu (575189) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057055)

I think the preDevCamp guys are over reacting. At least they are getting some acknowledgment from Palm. Let Palm release the damn thing first then have them focus their sites on the community. If the platform is solid and open, people will flock to it, with or without preDevCamp. dam

Irresponsibility to your shareholders! (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28057119)

You CAN be responsible to your shareholders THROUGH supporting a developer community. In fact, causing this "bad will" by not being supportive is an act of complete irresponsibility to your shareholders, because this move will damage the bottom line.

Corporations seem to forget... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28057133)

...that shareholders are irrelevant if they aren't getting paid through the money that consumers spend. So, if that's really how a company feels--that they only need to get down on their knees to fellate those few individuals who purchase their sock--then I have a simple solution. Stop giving that company your money.

Vote with your wallet, folks. I've been saying that for years.

Pre vs. iPhone 3.0 (2, Insightful)

TedTodorov (121485) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057307)

I continue to be mystified as to why anyone would seriously consider the Pre over the new iPhone. The iPhone 3.0 http://daringfireball.net/2009/05/the_next_iphone [daringfireball.net] will have twice or four times the capacity as the Pre for the same price (depending on how you wish to count Palm's rebate from the $299 upfront price). The iPhone has a thriving developer community that the will only expand when the iTablet finally gets released, and is unlikely to be duplicated by Palm, even if they stay ion business, which is far from a given.

And finally, the iPhone works worldwide, while the CDMA Pre is a US/Canada only device. That in and of itself decides the choice for me.

Re:Pre vs. iPhone 3.0 (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28057637)

Let's see...

- I'm going to pay a hell of a lot less for the same kind of data usage/plan from Sprint than I would from an iPhone provider.

- I don't want to switch carriers anyway

- The device is cheaper

- It has a physical keyboard

- I don't want to run iTunes

- My primary need is a MID, not a media device

- I don't need storage, I need capabilities

Palm lost the plot years ago... (3, Insightful)

argent (18001) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057311)

Palm lost the plot years ago, when they decided they wanted to make a laptop replacement to compete with the Pocket PC... even though they were kicking the Pocket PC 4:1 in the market even years after the iPaq allegedly "legitimized" the Windows Powered handheld.

They could have had Palm handhelds PROFITABLY for sale for $40-$50 in every grocery store in the US, if they'd followed the price-performance curve down to mass market levels. They could have sold entry level models for cost to school districts and replace the Ti-83 and equivalents in classrooms, and everyone would be using Palms and Palm Powered cellphones... but no, Compaq/HP had the ARM-based Pocket PCs and Palm wanted that last 20% of the market... and lost it all.

The Idiocy Of Slashdot Right There (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28057799)

Idiot writes blatantly false Slashdot headline.

Another idiot(the OP) without bothering to read the bullshit story sees this as opportunity to spew random garbage supporting their retarded agenda.

A bunch of other idiots with mod points who didn't bother to read all the posts shooting down the bullshit story summary and went right ahead and modded up the OP's inane ramblings.

Welcome to Slashdot.

Re:Palm lost the plot years ago... (1)

644bd346996 (1012333) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057923)

They couldn't have done well in the education market, because their platform was too open to games or software that teachers would view as cheating. That's why things like touch screens and IR aren't allowed in standardized tests, and consequently, are banned from most classrooms. Advanced hardware features typically implies the capability for software that is too advanced for most teachers.

Re:Palm lost the plot years ago... (1)

Ohio Calvinist (895750) | more than 5 years ago | (#28058185)

The TI-89/92 and I'm sure lower had the ability to run ASM programs. We played games on them all the time and the teacher encouraged it because in AP Calc, if you could pass without paying attention, and therefore more power to you, and if you failed because you were playing games, it was no sweat off the teacher's back. Not only that it got us more familar with the devices and taught us to use them more effectively rather than as $150 paperweights.

These devices also had ports for communication, and if there was a market, I'm sure could have had an IR dongle created.

If Palm made an Education model without the IR sensor and hard-flashed particular apps based on what the device was "for" (e.g. a touch calculator, a reading tool, a serial device controller) on low-end hardware for a low-end price, they could have sold millions of them for "specific applications." On the other hand they could have left them open, sold them for $50-60 bucks and given each student one and allowed teachers (if they wished) to integrate them into cirriculum.

There are so many uses for technology in education and the two limiting factors are technologically inept teachers with no desire to learn (Disclaimer: Wife and I both work in Ed, and trust me, there are many of these) and the high per-pupil cost. If they made these things cheap and easy and had buy in from administration they could have done amazing things with these years before OLPC was an option.

Re:Palm lost the plot years ago... (1)

Ohio Calvinist (895750) | more than 5 years ago | (#28058061)

You are exactly right. As Palm saw the tides turning, they should have said "We're going to be a great organizer at a great price that just so happens to run all sorts of applications" where PocketPC was "we're just a little tiny computer that can't do a lot of the things the big one can." If they'd stuck to monochrome on lower-end hardware rather than trying to keep up with PocketPC they could have sold millions of those things to people who thought they'd be a great tool, but not worth the price point versus a paper organizer, and been best-of-class.

That being said, they should have also kept the OS general enough and licensed it and you'd have seen the PalmOS in all kinds of embedded applications as linux hadn't developed enough to be as good of embedded OS as it is now.

Why I will never use *any* Palm product again : (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28057319)

Palm allowed Sony to produce hardware, but did not control the software end of that situation.

As a result, my Sony "Palm" device not only became incompatible with the desktop computer I was using, but it also corrupted the data on both the Clie and in Palm Desktop.

After this disaster, I use a plain cell phone ( non-smartphone )
and paper notes. It will be a cold day in hell before I use, let alone buy, any device sold by Palm or Sony.

Re:Why I will never use *any* Palm product again : (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28057363)

I agree. Palm screwed up their previous software+ hardware situation, and now they
expect people to forget about all that.

It's not gonna happen.

No Palm, no way, not even if it's free.

Why even try? (1)

ichbineinneuben (1065378) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057373)

What made them think this was a good idea to begin with? After more than a DECADE of customer abuse and putting the interests of their corporate partners ahead of their users (with the predictable result - shrinking market share) Palm DESERVES to die...

Meh (3, Insightful)

rnelsonee (98732) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057405)

I'm not sure a canceled meeting is newsworthy, but I do feel like Palm isn't bending over backwards to help developers.

There's still no SDK (I applied to be part of the second limited release - no response), and the SDK ain't exactly complicated - it's javascript - they don't need to do much else than provide the standard packages and put in some new keyword highlights, and get an simulator out. Also there's zero published documentation - I only get PDF updates from the O'Reilly book chapter by chapter as it's written, and even the emulator to get PalmOS apps on WebOS is third party.

Palm has enough competition with App stores - everyone from Blackberry to SymbianOS is getting their hands dirty with App stores this year. Palm's strength is its developers, and it seems they're going to just let this whole advantage go as they dribble out the SDK at a snail's pace.

When? (4, Insightful)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057445)

When will corporations realize that community support is the best way to drive success?

When it's true.
Sorry nerds, the best way to drive success is to dangle shiny bobbles in front of the plebes, and charge them out the ass for it.
Deal with it.

Deja Vu (1)

singingjim1 (1070652) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057447)

How many times have we heard this mantra,"When will corporations (insert any other bureaucratic organization here) realize.."? And will we ever stop repeating it?

devHissyFit (3, Funny)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057469)

not to worry, clearly these jokers are very well equipped to relaunch under a new name: devHissyFit

Communications have not broken down with Palm (5, Interesting)

LisaBrewster (1560355) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057713)

I had a phone conversation with Pam, Palm's VP of Developer Marketing last night, and I can assure you that communication has NOT broken down between them and preDevCamp. It's unfortunate that whurley, Giovanni, and Dan had such a bad experience, but for business reasons Palm has to maintain tight secrecy until the phone is launched. The best course of action in this case is not to scold them for what they can't do for us, but work together and adjust expectations accordingly.

Pam was very eager to know what we need to have a successful event, and I expect to have their full co-operation going forward. It just needs to be a bit more on their terms than whurley, Giovanni, and Dan anticipated.

There's a thread open regarding preDevCamp on the Palm Developer Network forums with at least three Palm employees actively participating (VP Pam, Community Manager Chuq, and Chuq's boss). Maybe yesterday's news put the fear of God in Palm, but they're definitely willing to work with the community to ensure that preDevCamp is successful.

Re:Communications have not broken down with Palm (1)

mattisking (1027604) | more than 5 years ago | (#28058051)

There's a thread open regarding preDevCamp on the Palm Developer Network forums with at least three Palm employees actively participating (VP Pam, Community Manager Chuq, and Chuq's boss).

Got a link?

Re:Communications have not broken down with Palm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28058167)

Palm's developer network forums are currently open only to those that have been accepted into the SDK early access program [palm.com] .

Re:Communications have not broken down with Palm (1)

LisaBrewster (1560355) | more than 5 years ago | (#28058183)

Only those with access to the Mojo Early Access program can see this, but there's the link: https://prerelease.palm.com/clearspace_community/message/1833 [palm.com]

And I stand corrected regarding which Palm employees are participating. Pam is Chuq's boss...Dave Weddle is just some bloke. ^_^

Hopefully they get a clue. (1)

magnusrex1280 (1075361) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057919)

Hopefully this action by Palm will severely limit the amount of developmer response, and Palm will learn a harsh lesson.

Where's the News Here? (1)

automag (834164) | more than 5 years ago | (#28057979)

Palm sabotages itself by making stupid and shortsighted decisions that are likely to cost them in the long-run? Where's the news here? This has been Palm's m.o. since the mid-90s... Is it any wonder that they continue to be an 'also-ran' in a market which they used to dominate? Next.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?