10 ms·

Open Source Fact and Fiction: HP Should Open Source WebOS

13 points by darkduck 15y ago

yalimgerger 15y ago
It was only a matter of time before somebody suggested this.
- Ubersoldat 15y ago
  Well, it's not a bad idea. Why let WebOS have the same faith BeOS (another Palm owned OS) be forgotten?
  - yalimgerger 15y ago
    Oh yeah absolutely. It is just an unimpressive one as it is so easy to come up with. :-)
schiptsov 15y ago
Just face the reality - comparing to Android, let alone iOS that thing does not exist. That is why HP dumped it. Even money cannot make it fly. ^_^
aaront 15y ago
Touchpads at rock bottom prices, ripe for toying with? Check. An OS (that is known to be compatible) to mod and run on this hardware? Hopefully their next step in this royal screw up. I mean, they could even make it more open than Android, completely transparent development. I would probably contribute to the project.
tzs 15y ago
I'd rate this as highly unlikely. They are more likely to want to sell off the Palm IP to someone else, and they aren't going to weaken the value of that by open sourcing parts of it.
bradleyland 15y ago
HP paid $1.2bn for Palm and all it's IP just over a year ago. If they were to open source webOS in any meaningful way (meaning, people could actually use it), they would have to similarly release the Palm patent portfolio to the public domain. For leadership in a publicly traded company to do this, they need some kind of plan to show that this would enhance shareholder value, and it needs to be a strong plan. Have a look at Google's strategy. Google maintains an open source mobile OS as a strategy for controlling the platform that delivers their product to consumers. Along with this major benefit, there are other strategic benefits as well. Giving away Android applies pressure to other competitors that encroach on Google's search product (Microsoft Bing) and other developing markets (Apple, Amazon, Facebook, etc). HP has, until recently, been a hardware company. It's hard to make a case for open sourcing the mobile OS you just paid $1.2bn for when there's the very real possibility that your competitors will pick it up and make a better device than you. I guess I need help seeing the strategic benefit to HP for open sourcing webOS. The two ways I see them extracting shareholder value are: * Selling the Palm patent portfolio outright * Identifying companies that encroach on their patents and extracting licensing fees

13 points by darkduck 15y ago

yalimgerger 15y ago

It was only a matter of time before somebody suggested this.

Ubersoldat 15y ago
Well, it's not a bad idea. Why let WebOS have the same faith BeOS (another Palm owned OS) be forgotten?
- yalimgerger 15y ago
  Oh yeah absolutely. It is just an unimpressive one as it is so easy to come up with. :-)

schiptsov 15y ago

Just face the reality - comparing to Android, let alone iOS that thing does not exist. That is why HP dumped it. Even money cannot make it fly. ^_^

aaront 15y ago

Touchpads at rock bottom prices, ripe for toying with? Check. An OS (that is known to be compatible) to mod and run on this hardware? Hopefully their next step in this royal screw up. I mean, they could even make it more open than Android, completely transparent development. I would probably contribute to the project.

tzs 15y ago

I'd rate this as highly unlikely. They are more likely to want to sell off the Palm IP to someone else, and they aren't going to weaken the value of that by open sourcing parts of it.

bradleyland 15y ago

HP paid $1.2bn for Palm and all it's IP just over a year ago. If they were to open source webOS in any meaningful way (meaning, people could actually use it), they would have to similarly release the Palm patent portfolio to the public domain. For leadership in a publicly traded company to do this, they need some kind of plan to show that this would enhance shareholder value, and it needs to be a strong plan. Have a look at Google's strategy. Google maintains an open source mobile OS as a strategy for controlling the platform that delivers their product to consumers. Along with this major benefit, there are other strategic benefits as well. Giving away Android applies pressure to other competitors that encroach on Google's search product (Microsoft Bing) and other developing markets (Apple, Amazon, Facebook, etc). HP has, until recently, been a hardware company. It's hard to make a case for open sourcing the mobile OS you just paid $1.2bn for when there's the very real possibility that your competitors will pick it up and make a better device than you. I guess I need help seeing the strategic benefit to HP for open sourcing webOS. The two ways I see them extracting shareholder value are: * Selling the Palm patent portfolio outright * Identifying companies that encroach on their patents and extracting licensing fees