×

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!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

169 comments

Does this mean.... (1)

trippyd (307143) | more than 2 years ago | (#38317932)

That the new combo OS, WebDroid, will be upon us?

Re:Does this mean.... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38317976)

Hopefully not. webOS is so far behind Android now that it would be a waste of time to develop it further. It's a classic case of "too little, too late".

Re:Does this mean.... (4, Insightful)

rwven (663186) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318026)

Evan as a fanatical android fan, I can tell you that you're dead wrong. webOS has a tons of great ideas both in the interface and underlying app-system that would be very useful in a combined scenario. The ability to write apps in the webOS way, for an android device, would be fantastically awesome.

Re:Does this mean.... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318182)

With ICS, webOS has lost most of its advantages and now that Chrome is coming out for Android, it will be just as easy to write apps based on web languages.

Re:Does this mean.... (4, Informative)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318736)

Android likely has an unassailable lead in application availability; but I know that WebOS's superior windowing/'card/swipe' gesture system made me feel like I was kicking a puppy by comparing a XOOM to a TouchPad...

I'm not sure that it would matter quite as much at phone-screen sizes; but the comparison at 10 inches was pretty stark.

Re:Does this mean.... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318268)

I hope that they release an update that will run on my Palm Pilot IIIc

Greatest little device I hardly ever used.

Re:Does this mean.... (1, Funny)

JazzLad (935151) | more than 2 years ago | (#38319240)

You want to run a modern OS on a 16mhz processor with a 320x320 screen? Good luck with that.

That said, I did love my IIIc back in the day.

Re:Does this mean.... (0)

JazzLad (935151) | more than 2 years ago | (#38319252)

Sorry to reply to self - that was a 160x160 screen. Oh, and 8MB RAM. Yeah, not gonna happen.

Best choice (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38317936)

From an economics perspective, this is probably the best return on investment they will get: goodwill.

Re:Best choice (2)

CockMonster (886033) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318332)

It didn't work for Symbian, it won't work for Web OS either. It's dead, any employees thinking that this will lengthen their career should think again, unfortunately.

Re:Best choice (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318432)

Comparing WebOS to Symbian is rather inaccurate.

WebOS is based on Linux and so, most of the skill sets for developing for any linux platform, will transfer relatively easily. And porting the entire platform will most likely be much less of a problem than Symbian. The biggest issue I ever saw with WebOS was simply that it was closed and restricted to HP.

Re:Best choice (1)

Forty Two Tenfold (1134125) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318640)

First of all, if they released it with good documentation, they're not simply dumping dead matter, it's a generous gift.

WebOS is based on GNU and so, most of the skill sets for developing Web or for any *NIX platform, will transfer relatively easily. And porting the entire platform will most likely be

...[moderately, non-uniformly] toilsome, because of drivers.

Re:Best choice (4, Interesting)

J. T. MacLeod (111094) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318438)

The community at large had little reason to care about Symbian. webOS has many things that are quite attractive about it for people that are not already committed to Symbian.

open sores (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38317952)

lol open sores. Look forward to lots of bugs going undiscovered for years, weak SSL keys and plenty of WONTFIX on your bug reports. Open sores ftw!

Nice work. (4, Interesting)

tripleevenfall (1990004) | more than 2 years ago | (#38317954)

I think they could have an opening here. If they really make efforts to avoid fragmentation and get get WebOS onto some future phone handsets, they could avoid some of the mistakes that have been made with Android.

Let people install WebOS however they want, don't load it up with crapware, give the users full control over the system. Make this the truly "open" mobile OS. ("open" means more than being able to see the source)

Re:Nice work. (4, Interesting)

alostpacket (1972110) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318282)

But how? If they use a license that forbids locking the phones and/or removing features and/or adding bloatware, who would make the phones? What carriers would sell them? Not saying your wrong at all. In fact I very much hope they drive carriers more towards being dumb pipes -- but the devil is in the details on something like this. What would the license need to be? GPLv3?

Re:Nice work. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318498)

That will be tough. The crap is added by the carriers, so if they simply provide the code the carriers will add it on before they sell the device. Perhaps they could add something to the license, or make re-installing from source really easy for end users to simply load a "clean" copy?

Meego is already there. (3, Informative)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318544)

Rooting an N9
Settings -> security -> developer mode

Re:Meego is already there. (4, Informative)

markdavis (642305) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318852)

And WebOS was/is also "rooted" on all devices. You just clicked on developer mode. Done.

It had been that day from day one.

Re:Meego is already there. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318922)

Not from day one. Since the first software update i believe; as that's when palm realized the power of the hacking community.

Re:Meego is already there. (1)

markdavis (642305) | more than 2 years ago | (#38319172)

You are probably correct. But it was in there a looong time, and pretty quickly from release.

Re:Meego is already there. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38319568)

the "power of the hacking community"? what power - palm and webOS failed horribly,
the HP and webOS failed horribly. there is no "power" displayed in reality.

Re:Meego is already there. (2)

vadim_t (324782) | more than 2 years ago | (#38319040)

That's not real root. Try using insmod to see what I mean.

Now on N900, there things work like they should.

Re:Meego is already there. (1)

MtHuurne (602934) | more than 2 years ago | (#38319710)

Indeed enabling developer mode gets you a non-root terminal or SSH login. You can get real root on N9 through "devel-su" though, so while it's one more step it's still easy enough.

Re:Meego is already there. (1)

vadim_t (324782) | more than 2 years ago | (#38319992)

No, that doesn't do it either.

Like I said, try to insmod something (not already loaded) after devel-su.

Re:Nice work. (2)

nine-times (778537) | more than 2 years ago | (#38319120)

If they really make efforts to avoid fragmentation and get get WebOS onto some future phone handsets, they could avoid some of the mistakes that have been made with Android.

Well one of the things that drive Android fragmentation is manufacturer add-ons and locked-down devices, meaning that you're not running the generic stock install and you probably can't install the vanilla version on your phone even if you want to. My understanding is that's not so much Google's fault as it is the carriers' fault and the device manufacturers' fault.

So can HP handle that better? I'm not sure how. What leverage do they have over the carriers?

Re:Nice work. (1)

Locutus (9039) | more than 2 years ago | (#38319248)

I agree and if HP spent all their efforts providing driver support for devices to be reflashed and left the user and OS stuff to the OSS community they might get somewhere. Doing this would initially enable the geeks to put WebOS on their devices, a few robots and probably some other interesting hardware. That could spin into more apps and more interest in the platform outside of just phones. Then it can prove its worth.

Otherwise, with only a short list of devices it'll run on there won't be much of a community behind it.

LoB

OSS majority (1)

lorinc (2470890) | more than 2 years ago | (#38317978)

Does that mean that free operating systems are getting a more common scheme ?

Re:OSS majority (1, Flamebait)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318214)

WebOS is linux (GPL), WebKit (LGPL), and some formerly proprietary code for interfacing the two.

This is a company dumping dead code that it doesn't have any more use for. (Much preferable to simply abandoning it.)

Re:OSS majority (2)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318324)

This is a company dumping dead code that it doesn't have any more use for.

Didn't HP recently say they planned on using it in printers [slashdot.org] ?

Maybe (though, admittedly, unlikely) HP is realizing they can use it for commercial products and have it open-sourced.

Of course, I seem to recall HP paying several billion dollars for Palm, so that's gotta leave a mark.

Re:OSS majority (4, Funny)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 2 years ago | (#38319922)

This is a company dumping dead code that it doesn't have any more use for.

Didn't HP recently say they planned on using it in printers [slashdot.org] ?

No, that was last week.

Awesome (5, Interesting)

catbutt (469582) | more than 2 years ago | (#38317984)

This is excellent news. The best thing about WebOS is that it is built on things that people are standardizing on elsewhere. Javascript, html5 etc. WebOS even has node.js built in, which really is a start at tying all these things together -- client side web development, server side development, and "native" app development.

This is clearly the direction things are heading, and like or hate Javascript, it's going to become the lingua franca for everything but system level or the most computationally intensive stuff. People get tired of reimplementing things they've already done in different languages. There are a lot of things converging right now, and this just might be something that pushes things over the top.

Re:Awesome (5, Interesting)

characterZer0 (138196) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318058)

The best thing about WebOS is that it is built on things that people are standardizing on elsewhere. Javascript

The worst thing about WebOS is that it is built on things that suck that people are standardizing on elsewhere anyway. Javascript

Re:Awesome (2)

catbutt (469582) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318198)

Javascript isn't perfect, but its better than having do use a combination of PHP, Objective-C, Java, and Javascript to reach everyone.

Re:Awesome (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318226)

Or just write it in C++ with Qt. Get far better speed, vast portability, and no need to use a shitty language like Javascript.

Re:Awesome (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318572)

I've written a few programs that uses a GUI. I've found I've spent more time playing around with the GUI's layout to get it looking presentable and writing code to handle user input than actual code that deals with the programs functionality. What I would like is the seperation of code and UI so I can work on the underlying code and then somebody else can work on the UI code. While JS/HTML/CSS isn't perfect for writing GUI's, there are a lot of people who have these skills due to web development and don't have much programming experience. If there was a programming framework that could get WebDevs involved where they did not need to do any coding other than when they would do on webpages then couldn't it could speed up application development?

Re:Awesome (2)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318696)

What I would like is the seperation of code and UI so I can work on the underlying code and then somebody else can work on the UI code

You mean like NeXT had in 1988 and Cocoa / GNUstep have now? Interfaces can be drawn by UI designers and just wired up to controller objects.

Re:Awesome (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318470)

The 90s called. They want their memes back! (And they told me to say this. :P)

Maybe if you stopped trying to write C, Java, Perl or PHP in it, you would be better in it and wouldn't have to hate it.
PROTIP: A prototype-based loosely-typed scripting language is NOT a object-oriented strongly-typed compiled language. Don't try to use it that way.
Right now, JavaScript has more elements of functional programming than C/C++ and Java combined. I recommend trying them, since they (especially Haskell-like ones) are way better than your outdated mindsets.

Re:Awesome (1)

characterZer0 (138196) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318672)

Prototypes, typing, functional elements, and abusive pseudo-OO are not the problems with JavaScript. The problems with JavaScript are as follows:

1) No threading.
2) It sounds too much like "Java", which leads to much confusion of newbies.

Re:Awesome (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318784)

JavsScript still sucks. The 90s called and asked why we're still using that shit language.

Re:Awesome (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#38319232)

JavaScript doesn't suck because it's prototype-based. It sucks because it has horrible syntax (that is also too verbose; at least Perl is concise for all its flaws!) and screwed up semantics in several things that are done differently in all other languages (like scope of local variables). It has literally nothing better over Python or Ruby or pretty much any other "scripting" language other than PHP and VBScript. Most certainly, it's no good for serious FP - heck, it doesn't even guarantee tailcalls, and its syntax for lambdas is ridiculously long, especially for one-liners that are typical in map/filter/reduce.

Re:Awesome (1)

alvieboy (61292) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318734)

Sorry, I have to disagree with you, at least in the present time.

I've been using some Web apps (javascript, html5, you name all techs involved), like floorplanner [floorplanner.com] and upverter [upverter.com] , and I find them barely usable. My computer is not however a high-tech one (Core2 Duo T2300 @ 1.66 Laptop, with Nvidia GeForce Go 7300), but it's specs would be *more than enough* to run such simple applications.

Perhaps the problem is not JS itself, nor HTML5. Perhaps the problem is we're using a technology which was not meant, on the first place, to do what we are doing with it.

It will take some time (and some standards) before we get Web Applications that can actually behave like native ones. But, my friend, it's not the time yet.

Re:Awesome (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318874)

Keep in mind that webOS does allow you to do processor intensive stuff in native code. Also, if the API is rich enough and well designed, that can make a bigger difference as to speed versus the language apps are written in.

Good Idea (1)

TheGrimmReaper (1927686) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318006)

I'm personally not a fan of WebOS but I see this as a good thing. In my minds eye, the very least it will do is be good will for HP.

A few billion to acquire it, then open source it?! (3, Informative)

jpstanle (1604059) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318014)

Doesn't make much business sense, but at least the community can actually benefit from HP's blunders this time.

Re:A few billion to acquire it, then open source i (4, Insightful)

catbutt (469582) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318108)

I think that anything HP can do to move people away from platforms controlled by their competitors, the better.

If webOS has all the right things to take off in a big way, a device maker like HP can really benefit. I don't think HP likes having to pay the microsoft tax on all their PC's (they'd sell a lot more cheap pc's if they could reduce the price by the cost of windows), so if the next generation of devices are built on open standards like javascript and html5 take off, all the better for HP.

Yes it would have been great for them if the world embraced webOS while it remaining fully owned by HP, but that just wasn't going to happen. The only possibility of getting people really interested -- given the head start both Android and iOS have -- was to set it free. It may turn out to be the smartest decision HP ever made.

Re:A few billion to acquire it, then open source i (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318114)

The current CEO is not the same person who purchased Palm (that'd be Hurd), and they're not even the person who fumbled the ball (that'd be Apotheker). Meg Whitman seems to be actually trying to sort out the mess left by the last two, and if that includes cutting the loses on WebOS then so be it.

Re:A few billion to acquire it, then open source i (4, Interesting)

Attila Dimedici (1036002) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318330)

Well, not when it is put that way. However, that is not quite the situation that exists at HP. One set of management bought Web OS with a business strategy in place to capitalize on it. That strategy proved to be a failure (or at least the implementation of that strategy proved to be a failure). A new management team came in, discovered that they have this asset that has a strong "fan club" among geeks but no current way for HP to make money off of it. They decided that they had two choices, stick it on a shelf somewhere or release it as open source. The first makes no money and in no way advances the company's interests. The second, also, makes no money, but does provide the company with some badly needed positive PR among a group that significantly influence opinion among their potential customers. Additionally, if the geek fans of WebOS can turn it into what they claim it has the potential to be, it will reduce the market power f several of HP's competitors.

Thanks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318016)

Maybe it can join the ranks of other software that rose from the ashes when its owners dumped it on the open source community, like the browser that lost the war against Microsoft. No really, thanks. It's better than throwing it all away. Not much better, but still.

What good is this? (1)

fortapocalypse (1231686) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318032)

Unless you have something to run it on that you'd want to run it on, why does it matter?

Re:What good is this? (3, Insightful)

the linux geek (799780) | more than 2 years ago | (#38319302)

It matters because plenty of people have these things called "smartphones" and "tablet computers" and wouldn't mind using webOS on them.

Are you sure? Waiting for decision to be reversed (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318034)

Nothing the management of HP has announced lately has actually stuck. It is bad enough that they are indecisive, but the fact that they can't stick to a decision means I'm not touching anything HP for a very long time. It would not surprise me if after open sourcing it and a lot of developers put a lot of time and effort into it, they attempted to close it back up.

Re:Are you sure? Waiting for decision to be revers (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318118)

Once it has actual been released they can not take it back, they can keep on distributing the old version under a closed licence and make their own improvements or drop financial support for the public version, but they can not take it back.

best of both worlds? (5, Insightful)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318040)

So HP has decided that they want to continue using and directing webOS, but they don't want to pay for its development.

Re:best of both worlds? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318094)

Yep it seems like it.
At least the product won't wither and die.

Actually it probably will wither and die. (3, Interesting)

mbkennel (97636) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318400)

Unless Google does something radically Ballmerian with Android, WebOS will bitrot. That's because there's no clear commitment from HP to have a continuous source of money, and there isn't any obvious evidence HP will be very ge

Post opensourcing, Mozilla was lousy for quite a while until Firefox. Firefox was pretty successful because there was a 1st version of a good product, skilled people motivated to work on it, and very importantly Google supplied them with quite a bit of stable money: payment flow from the Firefox home page. Then, Google had a strong interest in preventing IE from taking over, and funding Mozilla fairly generously was aligned with that goal. Now, Google has other imperatives and they have their own browser. As a consequence Firefox has less stable leadership and if they lose the revenue stream

By contrast, there is no particularly compelling reason for HP to fund WebOS development. What's in it for them? Does it help sell HP hardware? No. Does it help damage a competitor? No. Putting a few HP employees on it is not the same as giving lots of money to an independent foundation who can hire.

If HP needs those people to do something else, they will give up their WebOS, because people will follow the paycheck & whoever is doing their performance review.

Re:best of both worlds? (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318168)

Two points:

1. They still employ the software side of the WebOS team. The only people who were laid off were the hardware guys.
2. They've already said they're looking at Windows 7 or Windows 8 for their next tablet.

Re:best of both worlds? (1)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318934)

1. WebOS has a hardware component?
2. HP has also said that they were exiting the desktop market and looking to sell webOS.

Re:best of both worlds? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318190)

Bingo!

Great news! (1)

monzie (729782) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318042)

I hope someone ports WebOS for my BlackBerry Playbook. It has got really good hardware but the software ( read apps ) leaves much to be desired. Also this would mean that other tablet owners would have a choice as well - other than Android or BlackBerry Tablet OS ( QNX ) I am assuming that it would be very difficult to get other OSes on the iPad.

Re:Great news! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318148)

That's pretty much my situation with Motorola phones. They're tough, and the cellular radios are the best on the market. The locked down bootloader keeping me from tinkering with the software is driving me crazy.

What to buy? (1)

TAiNiUM (66843) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318110)

Alright, I'll bite. What is a good WebOS device for sale (I know, they're all discontinued) that we could buy and install the Opened OS on? The Veer appears to be the newest phone and the HP Touchpad the newest (only) tablet. I haven't previously paid much attention to their product line so I'm curious what hardware the WebOS enthusiasts prefer.

Re:What to buy? (1)

xelan (1191065) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318174)

There are supposed to $99 HP Touchpads on sale on HP's ebay site. I think I recall hearing the sale was supposed to begin sometime on Sat. Dec. 9.

Re:What to buy? (3, Informative)

naranek (1727936) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318382)

The preferred phone is Pre 3. I have one and it's ... well ... nice. Really nice. Not the superphone of my dreams, but really nice, and it's open. The webOS is marvelous, but there are a lot of kinks and small unpolished bits that are kind of annoying in the long run. I'm hoping opensourcing the OS will help fix those. The hardware isn't as good as I've been used to with Nokia phones, but it's nice never the less. The best points are the hardware keyboard and excellent design. The round shapes make it a unique piece of tech, and it fits in the pocket like no other, because everything's rounded. And did I mention it's open. People have been writing patches for years to improve the built in functionalities in all sorts of cool ways, so you get to customise it the way you like. OK now this is starting to sound like a pitch. I better stop.

Re:What to buy? (2)

keefus_a (567615) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318434)

As a huge WebOS fan that only moved away from it because Sprint never got updated hardware, I am partial to the vertical slider. When I first saw the Dell Venue Pro (http://www.dell.com/us/p/mobile-venue-pro/pd [dell.com] ) hardware I longed for that phone running WebOS (if you replace the dedicated smiley key on the keyboard with @). Add in a dash of microSD slot and upgrade the innards to more recent specs and I'm sold.

The catch is that nothing outside of existing Palm/HP devices fits the bill. One of the great things about WebOS is the touch area below the screen. Outside of the hardware specifically built for WebOS, nothing has that.

The Touchpad didn't have the extended swipe area, so I see no reason that any tablet (specs permitting) couldn't be a sufficient platform for WebOS. But I'm far less concerned with the tablet platform than I am with the phone platform.

Now just waiting on the ports. (1)

eheldreth (751767) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318206)

WebOS is awesome. I had a pre for a while and the only reason I moved to the Evo was the crappy hardware the pre was designed on. The screen on that phone cracked three times (right at the control button each time) and I did my best too baby it. Once it cracked while I was holding it in my hand. WebOS on decent hardware. I'll take that any day.

Obvious question (5, Interesting)

MonsterTrimble (1205334) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318220)

contributing webOS to the open source community

Under which license? GPL? BSD? Apache? Open source means a lot of different things.

Re:Obvious question (2)

ThorGod (456163) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318360)

Yeah, if they want to avoid fragmentation, BSD seems the way to go. (CCL == BSD, I think?) 30 years later and we don't have distributions of BSD, we have 'branches'.

Re:Obvious question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38319926)

The best choice is GPL. This is NOT because it is good for the public. This is because competitors MUST open source their projects while HP still retains the right to release a new version of WebOS under a proprietary license.

Maybe Android can get a better UI now!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318232)

Wow this would be great. Take the WebOS UI consistency and push it onto that craptastic android interface!

Thanks but no thanks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318244)

I've seen HP's Service Center, Quality Center, Motherboard (google "class action lawsuit Hp Motherboard"). I'll stick with a non-HP based software for all of my software needs

Re:Thanks but no thanks (4, Informative)

Kenshin (43036) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318406)

webOS isn't HP's baby. They just adopted it when they bought Palm.

While they're at it... (4, Interesting)

MikeRT (947531) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318294)

Hire a dozen or two engineers to work full time porting WebOS to popular Android tablets. Start with the Kindle and Nook tablet. Who says they need to make their own hardware for the foreseeable future if they can make it fairly simple to get WebOS working on a $200-$250 tablet you can get at Best Buy?

Re:While they're at it... (2)

cdrudge (68377) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318692)

I'm sure Amazon and B&N will gladly hand over the keys to their bootloaders to allow HP's firmware to run on their branded devices. While we're at it, maybe Nintendo, Microsoft, and Sony can all get together to allow any game to be played on any console.

Re:While they're at it... (1, Insightful)

Anne Thwacks (531696) | more than 2 years ago | (#38319732)

maybe Nintendo, Microsoft, and Sony can all get together

Please send me one of your flying pigs.

Sam Flynn did it (4, Funny)

fortapocalypse (1231686) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318306)

I saw him in the data center, and chased him onto the roof where he parachuted to a motorcycle, but we caught him!

About Time (1)

na1led (1030470) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318314)

This is about the smartest thing HP has done in awhile. About time somebody understands the power of Opensource.

WebOS / BeOS? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318336)

Does WebOS have any relation to BeOS?

Re:WebOS / BeOS? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38319354)

Does WebOS have any relation to BeOS?

No. BeOS was a completely different platform.

Maybe the fire sale was a strategy? (1)

bigsexyjoe (581721) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318364)

Maybe they sold the remaining stock of WebOS tablets cheap to prime interest from geeks and get on Slashdot. And now that they have our attention they want to take on Android. While Android is open source, Google has lost their rep with on Geeks on purity. Everyone thinks of Android as Big Brother in your pocket. If they are smart they can make WebOS, the mobile phone platform that RMS can approve of. And then they'd have something of value.

Re:Maybe the fire sale was a strategy? (1)

godrik (1287354) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318668)

If they are smart they can make WebOS, the mobile phone platform that RMS can approve of. And then they'd have something of value.

Unfortunately, that does not count for much in the regular world... Even in the geek world, the amount of people that would switch from android to something else just based on license would be minimal. I am pretty opiniated on licensing issues, but moving from android (a hacked version) to webOS does not make much sense...

Re:Maybe the fire sale was a strategy? (2)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318984)

A company that changes CEOs every 3 months cannot be said to have a "strategy".

Still irrelevant (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318366)

WebOS was an irrelevant also-ran from day one. There are already too many strong, established players in the mobile OS space. An OS requires critical mass in order for anyone (outside of a few hardcore geeks) to write software for it, and WebOS will never reach critical mass.

The market will support two or maybe three players. BlackberryOS is currently hanging on to 3rd place and even it may not survive despite having it's own cadre of rabid fanboys. Android isn't without it's warts, but it's the only viable open platform for mobile devices.

Bottom line is that this isn't going to woo anyone away from iOS, but it could divert valuable brainpower from making Android better. Forking, fragmentation, and duplication of effort are the banes of the FOSS community. Look at how many millions of man-hours worth of effort have been wasted due to holy wars and ego trips.

Re:Still irrelevant (1)

spottedkangaroo (451692) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318526)

People said this about nokia and blackberry before iphone came up, and they said the exact same thing before android came up. So the comments about too many strong players are clearly wrong, you just push a strong player out of the way when you come up. But you're also right. It'll never get that point. It's lacking two rather important things ... What WebOS needs is a strong partner that actually gives a shit and an actual device that ships with it. Last time I checked people rooting their phones to run other shit "voids your warranty" and shit like that, so you're never going to see more than like 0.05% of device owners ever installing something else, and of those only a small portion will try WebOS.

I'd probably try it. I loved it. One really nice thing on that platform was that rooting and installing shit was *SUPPORTED*. They had an app to fix it when you fucked it up, and if you bricked it (the guys on #webos-internals knew of a way, but they wouldn't say); they'd replace it.

I like that it's not illegal to root phones, finally, but we need legislation that says: if your device can't support rooting, then you need to replace it, sorry. I have different feelings about overclocking. Clearly overclocking can't be supported. Palm wouldn't replace them if you fried them from overclocking, but they had to kinda take your word on it too.

Re:Still irrelevant (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38319454)

WebOS was an irrelevant also-ran from day one. There are already too many strong, established players in the mobile OS space.

Bottom line is that this isn't going to woo anyone away from iOS, but it could divert valuable brainpower from making Android better

You're still thinking of WebOS as a product, not a platform. That is why you don't understand how this is different. Android has a craptastic arch that smells of hardware dependencies (screen size, anyone?), diverting attention from something that is destined to collapse under its own weight is a good thing (see: Windows & Co. as it slowly sinks and declines over the years)

tl;dr you're trying to productize something that isn't a product = Fail.

WebOS, HP and Intel. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318556)

What I'm rather wondering if this is a deal between HP and Intel. Intel had their problems with MeeGo, and Nokia dropping out. WebOS always seemed like a great alternative, especially as Tizen pushed back their alternative platform development quite a bit from MeeGo. Right now they have... Android, and possibly Windows in the future.

And HP gets their... UI for... printers.

HP making more hardware. (5, Interesting)

naranek (1727936) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318612)

Meg Whitman said in an interview with The Verge [theverge.com] that they are planning on making more tablets later. We'll see how that pans out, but it might give webOS a bit more traction.

Also the open sourcing webOS might open the door for the Dalvik VM and running Android applications on webOS. That would make things interesting.

iLO (1)

Scutter (18425) | more than 2 years ago | (#38318754)

It would be fantastic to see it embedded on iLO boards in HP servers. The ability to extend the iLO with user-supplied code would be terrific.

Gun to shoot yourself with... (1)

Junta (36770) | more than 2 years ago | (#38319682)

The whole point of the server service processors is to always work no matter what. To maximize the chance of this happening, the hardware vendors want the software running on them to be as tested and deterministic as possible. If end-user code fork bombs or triggers OOM killer to effectively ruin the running state of the service processor, that is bad. Ideally, you'd think an end-user would realize the blame was all their own, but two things occur:
-'Why didn't you make your platform bullet-proof no matter how my code misbehaves?'
-'I can't tell that *my* code is broken so I'm assuming perceived instability is due to the vendor'.

On the *other* hand, if you need to run custom code, you have an actual *operating system* to modify. Generally all the benefits of running *directly* on the service processor can be accessed by your choice of running in the managed OS and talking to the existing code or similarly doing it over the network.

Palm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38318882)

Too bad they did not leverage the Palm name and put out a Palm phone long ago. Ship has sailed.
I don't see any reason for this even as open source. If there were an open phone hardware for example, I would still use Android for the app support.
Unless a shit load of say Linux apps were ported to it or something.

mind lasers (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38319032)

the snail licked himself as the barber looked on, scratching his balls with a qtip.

2012: THE YEAR OF WEBOS ON THE... oh, wait... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38319170)

Yes! I hereby proclaim that 2012 will be the Year of WebOS (*cough*Linux*cough*) on the Phone(*cough*Desktop*cough*)... wait, stop me if you've heard this before...

(and before you go telling me I shouldn't mock it, I am a webOS developer and actually know a thing or three about the platform).

It's dead Jim. Open sourcing it isn't going to bring it back to life, any more than an autopsy will bring a cold, dead body back. But, the good news is that we'll learn some stuff from it that we otherwise wouldn't, and I'm sure it'll be of use to someone, somewhere. Somehow. Maybe.

You F4il It? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38319348)

has stead1ly of user base for visions going But it's not a sales and so on, sanctions, and BSD addicts, flame could sink your *BSD has steadily Our cau5e. Gay Gone Romeo and found out about the a popular 'news intentions and It racist for a about half of the has run faster For trolls' that they can hold give other people those obligations. want them there. Fact: *BSD IS A windows, SUN or would take about 2 SLING you can BSDI is also dead, posts on Usenet are recent article put is busy infighting Development models Downward spiral. In been many, not the bought the farm.... very distracting to
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...