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!

HP's Slate To Be Replaced By WebOS Tablet?

CmdrTaco posted more than 4 years ago | from the mondays-can-be-so-boring dept.

HP 170

itwbennett writes "Last week the rumor mill was rumbling about the demise of HP's Slate. 'This past weekend brought fresh rumors to the surface,' writes blogger Peter Smith. 'Now the insiders are saying that the Slate will be reborn as the HP Hurricane, and it will run WebOS. That makes perfect sense given HP's recent purchase of Palm and HP's declaration that they were 'doubling down on WebOS.' More surprising is the rumored launch date of Q3 of this year, which seems like a pretty fast turn-around. Particularly so if HP ditches the Atom and goes with an ARM processor, which Electronista suggests it would have to do.'"

cancel ×

170 comments

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

Last Week (5, Interesting)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 4 years ago | (#32156578)

Last week the rumor mill was also discussing WebOS tablets. This isn't a new shocking development, this was pretty much expected the moment they bought Palm.

Re:Last Week (1)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 4 years ago | (#32156764)

Last week the rumor mill was also discussing WebOS tablets. This isn't a new shocking development, this was pretty much expected the moment they bought Palm.

Wasn't this the main reason cited as to why they supposedly killed of their Win 7 "Slate"? The Jolly Rancher story was more of a surprise than WebOS on an HP tablet.

Re:Last Week (1)

Philip K Dickhead (906971) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157684)

Why doesn't HP just change their name to CA?

Maybe you can help me. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32156944)

I've been hearing a lot about tablets lately. There are so many to choose from, but they are also very expensive. You sound like you know a lot about tablets, so maybe you can help me out. Why should I spend a lot of money buying a tablet from Apple or HP, when instead I could just reach into my toilet bowl and grab something hand-held that's just as shitty, but at a very small fraction of the cost?

Re:Maybe you can help me. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32157032)

Not to mention that what comes out of your toilet would look just like Ubuntu, and work about as well. Oh, and it comes with embedded corn by default. So it's a win-win.

Re:Maybe you can help me. (4, Funny)

jmac_the_man (1612215) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157842)

Oh, and it comes with embedded corn by default.

It's called a microkernel.

Re:Maybe you can help me. (1)

oatworm (969674) | more than 4 years ago | (#32159352)

Maybe he's thinking about the Korn Shell. That said, I think Ubuntu is set up to use bash by default...

Microsoft? (1)

pagaboy (1029878) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157760)

The big question I can see though is: where does this leave Microsoft? Suddenly, the general feeling seems to be that Windows 7 isn't up to the tablet task. Which leaves Microsoft with nothing on the market. OK, you've got Bill Gates making some vague declarations of "doing something with a stylus", but there's nothing concrete. Win 7 doesn't cut it, Windows Phone 7 isn't out yet and probably isn't adapted to tablets. The world's premier OS manufacturer appears to have nothing to offer a whole new segment of personal computing. Apple, Google, HP... lone warriors fighting it out on planet tablet. The usual suspect nowhere to be seen.

Re:Microsoft? (4, Insightful)

dc29A (636871) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158304)

I have an MSI Wind all in one touch screen PC running Windows 7, and I understand perfectly why HP dumped Windows 7: it wasn't built for touch interfaces, period. The simple task of logging into the touch screen PC is a monster task, stuff like right click is clumsy, some gestures are all right but it's not made for touch screen. Also, a lot of interface elements are just too damn tiny, good luck selecting a tiny arrow from a drop down button that is about 22 x 22 pixels with arrow being about maybe 4 pixels. We pretty much stopped using the touch interface for our kitchen computer and just have a wireless mouse close by, and we don't do complex tasks on it, mainly some web surfing, online videos and XBMC.

I am pretty sure HP had other reasons too, possible battery life, need for more memory and storage, but I think the main reason for the dump was the awful interface. When you compare Windows 7 touch interface with other OSes, it is like comparing a Russian Lada (Win7) to a Bugatti Veyron (iPhone/Chrome/Android/WebOS).

Re:Microsoft? (1)

kimvette (919543) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158478)

Windows is perfectly capable of running on well on a touch interface - one company who got the tablet design right was Tatung. About six years ago I used a tablet with Windows XP and it worked great - they implemented the mouse driver well such that it was like Windows Mobile - clicking the screen would result in a left click, double click worked well, and click-and-hold gave you the secondary click, just like WinCE, er, Windows Mobile does. If you didn't want to use the handwriting recognition to log in you could pop up an on-screen soft keyboard. It worked very well and was a tablet that didn't suck. If it weren't for the underpowered CPU (a celeron) I would have bought one. It could also be run like a standard desktop by simply plugging in a keyboard and mouse, and even came with a dock to stand it up like a standard LCD monitor. I've tried other XP-based tablets since then and have never been as impressed. I'd like to try an XP-based one.

I wanted to try Ubuntu on that Tatung tablet, but because it wasn't mine I couldn't do it. :(

Re:Microsoft? (4, Insightful)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158684)

Uhh, you're talking about a pen based interface, not touch. Get it right.

Also Windows XP was horrible for Tablets, I know, I had one.

Re:Microsoft? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32159366)

I love pointless analogies:

Lada: Practical, affordable, reliable, compact, efficient
Veyron: Over-priced, over-engineered, does only a few things well [that you'll rarely use], status symbol

What was your point again?

Re:Microsoft? (1)

s73v3r (963317) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158342)

Well, if it were any other company, I'd say that this WebOS tablet (as well as the iPad, and a few of the Android tablets) might be needing some version of Office to do viewing and light editing of documents on. Of course, with the launch of the online Office thingy, that might kill some desire for dedicated apps on these devices, as long as the site works well in a standard (read: non Microsoft) browser, and works with a touchscreen.

WebOS? Intermeresting... (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#32156610)

I'm not surprised to see HP releasing something based on WebOS, but what do you all think the chances are of them taking WebOS and using it as a base to improve on, thereby creating their own version of it?

Re:WebOS? Intermeresting... (3, Insightful)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 4 years ago | (#32156638)

I think it's going to be an also ran against Android and iPhone OS.

Re:WebOS? Intermeresting... (1)

elewton (1743958) | more than 4 years ago | (#32156894)

Could the WebOS interface be used with Android, or Dalvik be ported to WebOS?

The interface would be especially appealing if it came with all those apps.

Re:WebOS? Intermeresting... (4, Insightful)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 4 years ago | (#32156970)

It could be but lets be fair.
WebOS has a better UI than Android.
WebOS has Multitasking which even iPhoneOS only sort of kinda has.

The one area that WebOS really was weak in was the SDK. The whole "javascript+HTML" thing is very limiting. The new PDK will give you access to C and some real performance and hardware access.

From just a UI point of view WebOS is a better choice than both of those for a tablet.
So maybe it will be a good alternative to both.

You know this desire to have a "Standard" really isn't a good thing. There was a lot of innovation and excitement when we had Apple, Atari, Commodore, Ti, Radioshack, and goodness knows how many others fighting it out.

When IBM came and "created" a standard the standard SUCKED. The 8088 was a terrible CPU with a terrible ISA. Systems like the Atari ST, and Amiga which where cheaper, more powerful, and offered features that MS-DOS wouldn't have for years could never compete.
Do we really want to dismiss alternative this early in a new and important market like the mobile space?
I mean lets be honest it would have been easy to say that the iPhone was going to be an also ran to WinCE/Mobile and PalmOS. I mean look how many devices and applications those OSs had!

Re:WebOS? Intermeresting... (-1, Offtopic)

medcalf (68293) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157448)

It's for exactly this reason that I really like the idea of Flash dying off. The native applications are a big deal in the short run, but in the long run the applications will largely be network-based/server-hosted, and so what you really want is a lot of choices in how to access those applications. Having iPhone-OS and Android and WebOS and ChromeOS tablets, and whatever else chooses to show up, allows the user to get exactly what they want, without compromise, and still have everyone using the exact same applications. This is a huge deal for companies when it matures, because it means that you can eliminate a lot of the overhead currently taken up by IT while improving end users' experience and access to information.

Re:WebOS? Intermeresting... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32158160)

This makes no sense. You really expect content developers to spend money creating an hardware/OS specific version of their apps for each device?

There will be a common, cross-platform runtime, because the people who pay for content creation want one.

Re:WebOS? Intermeresting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32159378)

There will be a common, cross-platform runtime, because the people who pay for content creation want one.

Yes there will. And it will be called HTML5.

Re:WebOS? Intermeresting... (3, Insightful)

RobKow (1787) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157574)

The IBM PC was more powerful than other systems at the time, and the 8088 was probably the highest performance/$ processor available, and had a better ISA than the 6800 series CPUs, IMNSHO. IBM didn't force anyone to buy PCs; they caught on because they were more powerful and reasonably priced. The 68000 was far too expensive at the time, and the inexpensive systems using it, the Macintosh, Amiga, and Atari ST, didn't arrive for another 4 years. By this time, the compelling reason to buy a PC or clone was for the huge software library.

Re:WebOS? Intermeresting... (4, Informative)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158522)

Not really. The 8088 in the PC was clocked at only 4.77 MHZ by that time multiple vendors where shipping Z-80s that where clocked at 6 or even 8 MHZ. The larger address space really didn't come in to play at that time since the PC ships standard with 16k and maxed out at 256k. Also 6502s at two to three Mhz where also available.
I would also say that the it is arguable that the x86 ISA was better then the 6809.
The 68000 was available at that time and frankly would have been fine at the HUGE price point that IBM introduced the PC.
The Amiga and ST where every bit the match in performance for the much more expensive AT.
The PC sold because of IBMs name. I was there and everybody thought IBM==computers.
The PC was a TERRIBLE standard but one we got stuck with.

Re:WebOS? Intermeresting... (1)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 4 years ago | (#32159432)

"[8088] had a better ISA than the 6800 series CPUs ... [IBM] caught on because they were more powerful and reasonably priced..."

No-ish, and definitely No.

Re:WebOS? Intermeresting... (1)

gladish (982899) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157914)

When IBM came and "created" a standard the standard SUCKED. The 8088 was a terrible CPU with a terrible ISA. Systems like the Atari ST, and Amiga which where cheaper, more powerful, and offered features that MS-DOS wouldn't have for years could never compete.

sort of like the iPad and printing?

Re:WebOS? Intermeresting... (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32158456)

I've used a Palm Pre, it's UI is slick, intuitive and a joy to use.

Then I tried to get an SSH client, there isn't one as far as I could tell. I thought "oh that's fine I'll use VNC web access" but then remembered it's implemented as a Java applet. The browser sucked, Gmail got stuck in infinite reloading loops when it wasn't outright crashing the browser (to be fair it didn't crash the OS). I tried finding an application repository, no joy. I tried an h.264 video, no support. I looked at developing for it, then found I couldn't use programming languages, I was forced to cludge together "applications" with document mark up languages. I gave up.

I'll stick to Android. (iPhone works but you can't help but feel like your taking it up the ass from some guy in a turtle neck)

Re:WebOS? Intermeresting... (1)

dave420 (699308) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158648)

You only use the document markup language to create the layout. Everything else is scripted. The script itself defines which HTML is used, not the other way round. Also, h.264 works fine on my Pre.

Re:WebOS? Intermeresting... (1)

xeoron (639412) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158902)

Was it doing that with the full-blown version of gmail or the mobile version?

Re:WebOS? Intermeresting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32158636)

You'll get no argument from me that the IBM standard "sucked." And I owned a Vic-20, C-64, as well as an Amiga.

However, the alternatives were NOT cheaper. By the time I got an Amiga in 1986, IBM clones were down to the $500 range while the Amiga was $1295 or thereabouts.

Having a standard (which I suppose Android is closest to being) results in cheaper computers.

Re:WebOS? Intermeresting... (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158790)

I think it's going to be an also ran against Android and iPhone OS.

That all depends on how nice this WebOS tablet looks, feels and works. Customers have already shown that they're willing to give up some of the niceties of a "real OS" for look and feel, so it really just comes down to how nice the tablet looks and if it feels nice in the hands and if you can do some zoomy stuff with your fingers on the interface.

Re:WebOS? Intermeresting... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32156720)

If they're planning on releasing a WebOS tablet, I'm sure they will continue to improve/expand WebOS (by necessity at least to support the larger tablet format). Anything they produce will of course be "their own version" since they now own WebOS. As a Pre owner, I'm happy to look forward to WebOS 1.5 or 2.0.

Re:WebOS? Intermeresting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32156756)

I'd say the real question is whether the can actually improve upon it, but I feel like it's obvious that they will certainly try (otherwise they just wasted $1.2 billion, but I wouldn't be too shocked considering it's HP).

Re:WebOS? Intermeresting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32158764)

I'd say the real question is whether the can actually improve upon it

Maybe they can partner with Adobe to exchange some of their great technology.

If HP and Adobe can combine the power consumption of Flash with the security and update features of Acrobat Reader, I imagine HP can build a tablet that will auto-update and reboot continuously every time you turn it on, until the battery dies a half hour later.

And, in return, Adobe can get "virtual ink cartridge" technology HP, where it costs $75 to replenish the "virtual ink" to display a PDF.

Peter Smith=serious business (0, Offtopic)

Gizzmonic (412910) | more than 4 years ago | (#32156680)

Peter Smith's slightly skewed profile picture exudes serious business to me. One look at that grimacing countenance and I'm ready to follow him to the gates of Hell...and, if necessary, liveblog about our encounters with demons! And of course, my preferred demon-liveblogging OS is WebOS!

Palm already had tablet ready for production (4, Interesting)

ArhcAngel (247594) | more than 4 years ago | (#32156736)

I put my money on Palm having a Pre-production (pun intended) version of a WebOS tablet ready to go and just needed a sugar daddy to pay for manufacturing.

Re:Palm already had tablet ready for production (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32156906)

I put my money on Palm having a Pre-production (pun intended) version of a WebOS tablet ready to go and just needed a sugar daddy to pay for manufacturing.

Surely they would've publicised this to add to their stock price before merging?

Re:Palm already had tablet ready for production (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157370)

If they had one, they almost certainly showed it to HP execs before the purchase price was agreed.

Re:Palm already had tablet ready for production (2, Insightful)

Ephemeriis (315124) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157470)

I put my money on Palm having a Pre-production (pun intended) version of a WebOS tablet ready to go and just needed a sugar daddy to pay for manufacturing.

HP has probably been playing around with tablet designs... Palm has probably been playing around with tablet designs...

I doubt if it would take too much effort to grab one of those designs, shine it up a bit, and throw it into production. Even if they have to switch to a different CPU.

Re:Palm already had tablet ready for production (3, Interesting)

WillAdams (45638) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158130)

HP has a _very_ long history of creating tablets --- datingway back to, e.g., the HP OmniGo 100 which ran GEOS and had Graffiti:

http://www.thocp.net/hardware/hp_omnigo100.htm [thocp.net]

And they purchased Compaq whose TC1000 hybrid Slate design has yet to be equalled:

http://h18000.www1.hp.com/products/quickspecs/11429_na/11429_na.HTML [hp.com]

Someone has to take over tablet leadership now that Fujitsu has dropped slates....

William

Re:Palm already had tablet ready for production (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158452)

Plus, while the "WebOS" design does have its downsides, the fact that most of the guts are either stock-ish linux, or mostly standard javascript and web stuff running on webkit likely makes porting pretty easy(and it isn't as though there is a huge installed base of native applications to hold them back, yet). I'd assume that Palm has had an x86 version running from day one(heck, they probably started development on x86).

HP has the option, depending on whether they value time-to-market or battery life/BOM cost more, to either dump WebOS on exactly the same hardware they were waving around with Win7, or rework the design with some ARM SoC.

Re:Palm already had tablet ready for production (1)

Svartalf (2997) | more than 4 years ago | (#32159514)

I don't think they'd need to even switch to a new CPU, save for power consumption reasons (a switch to a Cortex-A8/A9 SoC will quadruple the battery life for the tablet and either minimally impact the performance over the Atom (A8) or boost it (A9)...)- the stuff's mostly Linux with the WebOS UI and PDK layered on top of it.

This means you can actually have an Atom based WebOS tablet out of the gate if they so chose.

The key question remains ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32156774)

Will it run Flash?

Re:The key question remains ... (1)

LurkerXXX (667952) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157002)

It's not a key question at all. Adobe has demo'd the Pre running a flash beta. Adobe just isn't ready to release their new version for the mobile market yet. Whenever Adobe gets done with their slow, ever-delayed production cycle, the new version of Flash will be on WebOS as well as Android and MaeMo/Meego/whatever-the-heck-else-it's-called-these-days.

Re:The key question remains ... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32157166)

To me it is, this will be the iPad killer for sure.

As long as I can access RedTube on this tablet, I'll defiantly buy it, Since iPad wont support flash I cant imagine why any reasonable person would buy the piece of shit iPad.

You dont even get a USB on iPad, I bet the Hurricane will defiantly have support for USB and perhaps even a 5 in 1 slot so I can store all those photos I took of my sister showering and upload them to my favorite website, RedTube.

I believe without a doubt if the HP gives me the freedom to jack off without getting my pubs entangled in my keyboard. This will be the most sensible purchase I would of made for a long time.

I just hope I can purchase the tablet before Conroy releases his filter and blocks me from visiting RedTube, then I'll be forced to watch lesbian softcore porn which I'm certain the scum sucking cracker will be intercepting to add to his own collection.

Re:The key question remains ... (3, Informative)

WiseWeasel (92224) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158166)

I hate to respond to trolls, but I just tried it out, and Redtube works fine on my iPhone. You'll be happy to know that you can still play the skin flute without Flash installed.

Re:The key question remains ... (1)

AVryhof (142320) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158278)

See Flash....
See Flash Run....
Flash Runs fast!

HP Hurricane? (4, Insightful)

Darth Snowshoe (1434515) | more than 4 years ago | (#32156884)

Could they pick a tackier or more insensitive name?

Re:HP Hurricane? (3, Funny)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#32156924)

Maybe they plan on getting the Knight Sabers to sing a theme song for their product.

Re:HP Hurricane? (1)

Gravatron (716477) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157888)

In a two for one special, the ones with the exploding sony batteries will be nicknamed 'boomers'.

Re:HP Hurricane? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32156934)

Could they pick a tackier or more insensitive name?

Yeah, it blows.

Re:HP Hurricane? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32156974)

I know, I thought the HP Raperjet was pretty bad, but "Hurricane." They are spitting in the face of Jesus Christ!

Re:HP Hurricane? (4, Funny)

Renderer of Evil (604742) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157012)

In their defense, Dell had already secured the name to Gulf Oil Spill Tablet. It was either Hurricane or HP Malaria.

Four itterations later (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32159144)

Its still better than the plan for the fifth version: HPV

Re:HP Hurricane? (1)

residieu (577863) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157348)

Nah, I think they got it about right to catch all the hypersensitive idiots that they don't want using their product.

Re:HP Hurricane? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32157592)

How's "HP Katrina" sound?

Re:HP Hurricane? (1)

oztiks (921504) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157692)

And iPad wasn't insensitive http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vurJB0uHcTY [youtube.com]

I guess its just the rule of thumb when it comes to creating tablet pc's, give them really crappy names ...

Re:HP Hurricane? (1)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157698)

They named it that because HP is about to rock you...

Re:HP Hurricane? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32157790)

well shit, you never sent them your list of 'names considered to be insensitive because i am a fag'.

Re:HP Hurricane? (3, Funny)

ThrowAwaySociety (1351793) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157988)

Could they pick a tackier or more insensitive name?

It's part of a theme that HP has going on. Their line of high-end servers was called Superdome [wikipedia.org]

Re:HP Hurricane? (4, Interesting)

AVryhof (142320) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158248)

They should have just stuck with the iPaq name ...I bet that would have really pissed Apple off, because they wouldn't be able to do jack about the use of it, considering iPaq ws already used for an earlier generation product well before the iPad was even dreamed up.

WebOS can run CPU's other than ARM (1)

JazzyJ (1995) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157272)

No, they wouldn't have to go with ARM. WebOS is linux based, they'd just need to recompile the kernel and libraries, and include whatever drivers are needed for the slate hardware. Oh, and a boot loader, I guess. None of that takes long to do tho - Hell, they might have already done it.

In fact, the webOS sdk runs on a virtual x86 cpu with virtualbox. It's just a cross-compile of the kernel and libs with hardware drivers for the VirtualBox hardware.

Re:WebOS can run CPU's other than ARM (1)

Comboman (895500) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157516)

Running and running-efficiently-on-battery-power are two very different things. I suspect WebOS is highly optimized for the ARM and it would take time to re-optimize it for the Atom.

Re:WebOS can run CPU's other than ARM (1)

Svartalf (2997) | more than 4 years ago | (#32159576)

I'd bet not.

"Highly optimized" is a BS word- the tricks to making it go good on an ARM largely apply to x86 because x86 allows you to do some pretty braindead things with it.

Re:WebOS can run CPU's other than ARM (1)

jdgeorge (18767) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157524)

True. But by staying on ARM, they can ensure that all of the applications optimized for the hardware will still be optimized for the hardware. Changing the architecture from ARM to Atom would require a LOT of new work for performance-sensitive applications.

Therefore, I suspect they'll keep the hardware architecture. For a while, at least.

Re:WebOS can run CPU's other than ARM (1)

Svartalf (2997) | more than 4 years ago | (#32159596)

WHY? Unless you're doing it in Aseembly language, there's nothing magic or special that'd "optimize" it any more than specifying -O3 to GCC. You'd just need to ensure you're not generating bad code there and you'd be done.

More to the point, the bulk of the WebOS applications aren't native code to begin with.

Dear HP (5, Interesting)

fredrickleo (711335) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157332)

Dear HP,

Please release a WebOS rom/image/update/etc for all the Palm TX's and other Palm devices that are already out there but probably not being used on account of stagnant OS software and applications.

I believe many of these devices are capable of running WebOS and you could create a community almost overnight. I'm sure I'm not the only geek looking at my TX wishing I could use it in some meaningful capacity again.

Re:Dear HP (4, Funny)

medcalf (68293) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157502)

I'm just amused at the image of the business meeting where that would be proposed. I had a director once whose reaction would have been: "That's very interesting, out-of-the-box thinking. Now get back in the box!"

Re:Dear HP (1)

radish (98371) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157840)

Would WebOS even fit in the TX's 128mb flash? Or 32mb ram? It's a nice idea but the specs on the older devices are so far behind the Pre it seems kind of unlikely to me.

Re:Dear HP (4, Insightful)

ProppaT (557551) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157926)

WebOS doesn't run the best on the Palm Pixi. Dropping down to an older gen CPU with a slower clockspeed would probably be nearly unusable, especially with the low RAM of those older devices. Even if this did happen, the performance would be poor and they'd have to disable things that really MAKE the OS, such as multitasking....

Re:Dear HP (2, Insightful)

bhtooefr (649901) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158052)

Right. Because, you know, a company that sells hardware is going to spend tons of cash porting WebOS to a 5 year old PDA.

Re:Dear HP (2, Interesting)

fredrickleo (711335) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158462)

The arguments regarding RAM are legitimate but it wouldn't take tons of cash to port the OS. It would likely just take a few Palm engineers with intimate knowledge of the TX hardware and webOS (the same people perhaps? who knows).

To me it seems like the driving force behind whether any of these mobile platforms succeed is whether there are applications and developers. HP is in a unique position because there are already a ton of Palms in the environment and they could leverage that to their advantage. If suddenly everyone's Palm was able to run webOS, developers might consider developing some applications for it. Having an extensive software library would obviously help with long term sales of future HP products.

The argument is really moot without some real figures but HP should have that information, I just wanted to bring it to their attention in case it hasn't been considered (although the fact Palm didn't do it is probably telling). Who knows, maybe HP is willing to take a little risk and put a couple of engineers on it to see if anything comes of it.

Re:Dear HP (1)

alen (225700) | more than 4 years ago | (#32159418)

are they still at Palm? i've read that Apple stole a lot of Palm people when they started iPhone development

Re:Dear HP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32159714)

And then Jon Rubenstein left Apple's mobile division to become head of engineering and later CEO of Palm.

Re:Dear HP (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32159294)

The touchscreens on the Palm handhelds (like my T3) don't support multi-touch, and never will. Also, no WiFi except in the very last generation of devices.

So while it might be an interesting exercise in hacking, it's not of much practical utility.

After using an iPad for a week (2, Interesting)

fredmosby (545378) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157408)

I think this is a good move for HP. The slate would have been the same as all the tablet pc's that came before it which basically failed in the market. A web OS tablet might be a decent competitor to the iPad.

Re:After using an iPad for a week (4, Interesting)

norminator (784674) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157804)

I never understood why Balmer acted like anyone should care that he was introducing the Slate, when tablets had failed for years, and this was just another one (other than the fact that he was trying to preempt the iPad announcement). Now, the irony is that the tablet that he introduced to the world has turned to vapor before it could be released, and MS's lame attempt to steal Apple's thunder is being reborn in a device that may actually steal some thunder from Apple and a lot of thunder from MS, running a non-MS operating system (the only way it can really work right as a tablet).

I'm sure Balmer would like to pretend that it doesn't exist now. I'm looking forward to reading his dismissive comments about it (the sure sign that it's going to be a success) after it's officially announced.

Re:After using an iPad for a week (1)

Gilmoure (18428) | more than 4 years ago | (#32159454)

Don't forget Courier.

Re:After using an iPad for a week (2, Insightful)

MikeFM (12491) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158994)

Without a lot of work I just don't see Android or WebOS as a competitor against the iPad. About the most they can hope for is to be a cheaper alternative which may get sales but will still leave them as also-rans. People that buy a Visio tv from Walmart would buy them but would lust for an iPad. The iPad is buggy and the available software is mostly inflated iPhone apps and buggy, if you can find it at all, just released stuff and I still love the darn thing. You can just feel the potential radiating from the thing. I've yet to see any other brand of slate anywhere near as sexy and half of that is the well thought out interface. I'd love to see Android and WebOS kick up the competition but they need their own Steve Jobs to throw out all the garbage and force them to take real shape. Someone with some sense of style and usability that is okay with being a jerk and telling people to go do it again over and over and over again. (That is what most software projects need.) I always liked id's "When it's ready." motto. Make me wait but make it worth waiting for.

More excited for Android tablet. (2, Interesting)

MrCrassic (994046) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157434)

Prior to having been given a G1 over the weekend, I didn't think very highly of Android OS. It strongly reminded me of the Windows Mobile scene I was involved in when I had my WinMo devices (Treo 750, HTC Excalibur/Raphael), which was anything but pleasant. However, as I spend more time with the device, I am constantly growing fonder of it. It's very versatile, extremely expansive and, in my opinion, is a mobile OS that actually has the potential to double as a useful and appropriate OS for tablet computing.

With that said, how does WebOS stack up against Android? On the whole, is it a stronger or weaker OS, and how much more difficult is it to develop for? I haven't yet tried making apps for the Android, but I've heard that it's very straightforward.

Re:More excited for Android tablet. (4, Informative)

gobanjoboy (1808424) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158174)

They are both built on top of Linux. I agree with you, that Android feels more like a Winmo style interface. I find WebOS to be more elegant and less computer like.

WebOS SDK/PDK supports : HTML5(HTML/css/javascript) | c/c++
Andriod SDK/NDK supports : Java | c/c++


I can at least say that WebOS is super easy to develop for.

Re:More excited for Android tablet. (1)

MrCrassic (994046) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158348)

I said that I had that impression before I started using it. After a few days, the resemblances between them mostly faded away except in a few small areas. For one, a bone-stock Windows Mobile ROM is far from attractive. The most attractive thing about it is its honeycomb Start menu, which looks incredibly dated amidst all of its alternatives, which lay its applications right in front of its user. Another big difference is that WinMo has barely any support for multi-touch out of the box; hell, it's not even all that finger-friendly (a lot of apps are designed to be used with a stylus, which, again, is terribly ancient nowadays).

Meh (1)

lennier1 (264730) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157700)

Don't care about what OS it ships with as long as it can be nuked to replace it with Ubuntu/Debian.

Re:Meh (4, Funny)

GilliamOS (1313019) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158058)

It's a damn tablet! Not every bloody piece of technology is supposed to be able to have something to do with Linux. You want Linux on your tablet? Too bad, go buy a Netbook. You Linux users get right on my nerves most of the time: 'Is this microwave open standards compliant?' 'Is this toaster open source?' 'Does anybody know where I can get a Linux compatible table lamp?' 'Has anyone tried installing Linux on an alarm clock?' I tells you it never ends!

Re:Meh (1)

lennier1 (264730) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158564)

Might've been a bad time for you to stop taking those meds. ;)

webOS is a Linux-based OS as well but due to the larger form factor and the to be expected increase in processing power I want something more productive rather than having to deal with a castrated "phone edition" (coming from an N900 owner).

Re:Meh (1)

Gilmoure (18428) | more than 4 years ago | (#32159616)

Yeah, NetBSD is what runs on everything+toaster.

Re:Meh (1)

inamorty (1227366) | more than 4 years ago | (#32159744)

Not much uptake on the GilliamOS then? :P

Re:Meh (2, Informative)

gobanjoboy (1808424) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158308)

This can already be done.

http www.webos-internals org/wiki/Debian

What HP's Palm Purchase Really Means (4, Insightful)

d3xt3r (527989) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157774)

I think it was obvious from the start that the Palm acquisition was all about WebOS and tablets, not smart phones. Anyone else see this purchase and cancelation of Slate as a huge setback for Microsoft? It's basically a public admission by HP that Windows can't cut as a tablet OS.

HP just broke their direct dependence on Microsoft for an emerging market for a good reason: Microsoft's failure to produce an innovative user interface for tablets.

Re:What HP's Palm Purchase Really Means (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32158450)

It's also a huge setback for Intel and the atom...

Re:What HP's Palm Purchase Really Means (1)

bemymonkey (1244086) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158628)

Anyone else see this purchase and cancelation of Slate as a huge setback for Microsoft? It's basically a public admission by HP that Windows can't cut as a tablet OS.

Windows may not be able to cut it as a consumer tablet OS, but it does just fine on actual Tablet PCs, thank you very much.

*Scribbles on Thinkpad tablet and giggles* :D

Re:What HP's Palm Purchase Really Means (3, Interesting)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158660)

I suspect that that is part of it(which is certainly an ice burn, since poor old Bill Gates has been chasing tablet computing since back before Steve Jobs got booted from apple); but I suspect that there is a secondary factor:

Margins/differentiation. IIRC, HP is, by volume, the largest mover of generic wintel crap in the world. For all that, they make fairly modest amounts of money, and most of the good margins are in their high end stuff and consulting services. This is largely because, if you ship Windows boxes, you basically don't have any differentiation potential. You can do a little bit of case styling, or ship a bit of your own shovelware; but not much else.

If this were just about Win7 sucking at tablet, HP would have gone with Android. To get WebOS, (and Palm's people), cost them 1.2 billion dollars. Android would have been free. Even if there is a de-facto cost associated with being Google's special friend and development buddy, which is certainly possible, it is probably a lot less than 1.2 billion. However, if they had shipped an Android device, they would have been just another android device maker, wholly undistinguished. Given that they paid a good bit of cash for Palm, I'm guessing that they don't want that.

Re:What HP's Palm Purchase Really Means (1)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 4 years ago | (#32159068)

Exactly. And even if this webOS fails to catch fire for HP, the fall back to google Android is just as bad for them. Microsoft needs to corner the low power device OS market before Google closes the door. On the other hand if HP does succeed at a middling level then it's actually good for microsoft in a way. It will mean the non-ipad world will be running a mixture of OS's and there will be no settled standard. This will give breathing room to others like say 1) microsoft, 2) symbian, 3) maybe even OLPC.

*nix wins on mobile (4, Interesting)

fermion (181285) | more than 4 years ago | (#32157802)

The upshot of all this seems to be that MS, and really full proprietary software in general, has long the mobile market. After all these years of being told that OSS software is dangerous, inefficient, and defective, we are at a point where the mobile phones mostly run on software on which at least some layers are at least derived from OSS. Even Nokia, which is suing the hell out of anyone that looks at it funny, has Symbian and Qt.

Which leaves RIM, which has good solution for business and has a large market of consumers who want to look like important business people, and the dwindling share of Windows Mobile, some reports indicate a 50% drop in market share since fall of last year.

The fact that iPhone is more closed that some people want causes pain, but would you rather have a company like MS suing everyone that uses OSS software on the mobile platform? I think we can just celebrate that with Google and Apple producing good products using OSS, we can stop wasting time on the Open versus Proprietary debate, and just produce many different good products from which people can choose.

Obligatory (3, Funny)

iluvcapra (782887) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158120)

It's just a big Palm Pre? What a ripoff! /sarcastic

Re:Obligatory (4, Insightful)

MikeFM (12491) | more than 4 years ago | (#32159152)

I'm sure somebody will say it and mean it. It's pretty funny that geeks think that way. It just shows how disconnected they are from what the average consumer wants. With all the bitching about the iPad I've decided that what the average geek wants is a Model M keyboard with a green on black screen that sticks awkwardly from the top so everyone can see they are running Linux. It'd probably have a separate battery that hung from their belt and connected by a thick rubber cord. Half of them wouldn't know how to do anything useful but they could feel proud that the device is fully opensource and be happy that everyone could see how uber elite they are. They'd try to get their grandma to switch to their nerdpad because she wouldn't have to use any nasty user-friendly multi-touch interfaces controlled by the man. And they'd probably wank to ascii porn.

Yeah - so I think the rest of us will avoid the nerdpad and stick to nice devices based off user-friendly designs such as iPhone OS and maybe even webOS and Android (although they, especially Android, has a touch of the nerdpad still there).

Re:Obligatory (1)

NiteShaed (315799) | more than 4 years ago | (#32159456)

you've got it backwards, the Pre was just a little tablet. Think prototyping, it was a scale model for a future product.....which explains the build quality :-P

Re:Obligatory (1)

TheNumberless (650099) | more than 4 years ago | (#32159612)

You know, I never did understand that criticism. "Why would anyone buy a 21" monitor? It's just a big 13" monitor!"

old palms - eink (1)

jlebrech (810586) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158306)

hp just reengineer the old palm os to work with e-ink.

maybe a cheap eink mobile phone. that would rock.

Why would they want to take $200 in COGS . . . (1)

NicknamesAreStupid (1040118) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158368)

. . . out of their product by removing Intel's processor and Microsoft Windows? Well, there you go.

webOS, not WebOS (2, Informative)

PeekabooCaribou (544905) | more than 4 years ago | (#32158406)

It's webOS, lowercase "w."
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>