4 ms·

Honest question: to what end is this happening? They receive no money from a sale of the project, they still have to commit engineering resources, they lose som

by jpxxx 15y ago

Honest question: to what end is this happening? They receive no money from a sale of the project, they still have to commit engineering resources, they lose some level of control over its development and its future,and how is it going to be placed into someone else's aboveboard commercial mobile product if there aren't any guarantees against patent attacks? What is the upside?

unwantedLetters 15y ago
Well, if nothing else, good publicity. (There might be other upsides, but that must be a fairly major reason)
jdthomas 15y ago
Upside: They look slightly less foolish?
tewolde 15y ago
This is a platform play. Think of it like a casino, HP is the house. It sits in the middle, makes the rules and pockets the mindshare, influence...and maybe some money. Samsung, HTC have been desperate for an alternative to android since the Motorola purchase by Google. If HP does this right, I have little doubt we will see future webOS devices.
- TomOfTTB 15y ago
  If these companies are "desperate for an alternative" why didn't they embrace webOS before? Or why aren't they pushing Windows Mobile? Or, if they want open, why not just fork Android like Amazon and Barnes and Noble? Are you seriously suggesting Barnes and Noble has more technical resources than HTC and Samsung?
  - masklinn 15y ago
    > why didn't they embrace webOS before? Because they could not? The only way they could was to buy it from HP, and that costs money. > Or why aren't they pushing Windows Mobile? HTC has WP handsets out. > Or, if they want open, why not just fork Android like Amazon and Barnes and Noble? Are you seriously suggesting Barnes and Noble has more technical resources than HTC and Samsung? B&N customizes Android by cutting down on features to pare it down to a tablet, the requirements are... lower.
    - TomOfTTB 15y ago
      > Because they could not? The only way they could was to buy it from HP, and that costs money. The money saved on software licensing isn't enough to make the difference if these companies were "desperate" for an alternative. As you pointed out HTC is making Windows Mobile handsets right now and it costs money. (Though again my point on HTC was they'd be pushing WP if they were desperate to get away from Android and they aren't) > B&N customizes Android by cutting down on features to pare it down to a tablet, the requirements are... lower. What features has B&N paired down in the Nook? They've restricted the use of some features but they haven't removed anything that I know of. Meaning what they have done is add a shell on top of Android just as any other manufacturer could do. Even if you buy the argument that it would be harder for Samsung and HTC to adopt webOS feature into a shell you can't argue that it would be harder than switching to an entirely new OS and putting the marketing budget into it to attract development. If that were easy HP would have done it.
      - tewolde 15y ago
        It's all about hedging your bets. Until today, android was the only open source platform these companies could use. This gave Google an advantage to define the rules. For example, they could actually start closing parts of the source or giving Motorola preferential treatment. Google had the sole power to define what an "open" platform was and the rules in using it. Developers, telcos and HW companies now have a second option. HP may not make a dime from this move, but if the move is cheap and it can cost the competition more to respond, then it is a move is well played. Lastly, HP is a hardware/software/services company so this move will give it some leverage when dealing with large players in those areas.
- masklinn 15y ago
  Samsung has bada already, I don't think they've been desperate for much. HTC, yes. I can see Acer, LG and Sony in that latter category as well.
robbrown451 15y ago
I think HP would benefit if the mobile/tablet landscape was not so dominated and controlled by two of their competitors
- steele 15y ago
  The fire sale puts them in a decent position against Android.
jnbiche 15y ago
And the upside of Google doing the same to Android was?
- mikecane 15y ago
  Google gets Google Search on devices. And HP will get ... oops. A piece is missing here.
  - mikecane 15y ago
    I figured out the piece: the webOS App Catalog. Keep it going. Future profit justifies webOS continued development.
    - jpxxx 15y ago
      I don't think there's remotely enough money in apps to justify future development. This OS will need hundreds of millions of dollars in development to stay competitive and it's not starting with a userbase of any real size.
      - bmajz 15y ago
        It could be a good way for them to claim "units" of sale vs. Apple since iOS+Mac already has Apple in a strong second in PC sales. There's some face to be saved in being the top PC seller. Oh wait, Apothekar already tried to jettison that.

by jpxxx 15y ago

unwantedLetters 15y ago

Well, if nothing else, good publicity. (There might be other upsides, but that must be a fairly major reason)

jdthomas 15y ago

Upside: They look slightly less foolish?

tewolde 15y ago

This is a platform play. Think of it like a casino, HP is the house. It sits in the middle, makes the rules and pockets the mindshare, influence...and maybe some money. Samsung, HTC have been desperate for an alternative to android since the Motorola purchase by Google. If HP does this right, I have little doubt we will see future webOS devices.

TomOfTTB 15y ago
If these companies are "desperate for an alternative" why didn't they embrace webOS before? Or why aren't they pushing Windows Mobile? Or, if they want open, why not just fork Android like Amazon and Barnes and Noble? Are you seriously suggesting Barnes and Noble has more technical resources than HTC and Samsung?
- masklinn 15y ago
  > why didn't they embrace webOS before? Because they could not? The only way they could was to buy it from HP, and that costs money. > Or why aren't they pushing Windows Mobile? HTC has WP handsets out. > Or, if they want open, why not just fork Android like Amazon and Barnes and Noble? Are you seriously suggesting Barnes and Noble has more technical resources than HTC and Samsung? B&N customizes Android by cutting down on features to pare it down to a tablet, the requirements are... lower.
  - TomOfTTB 15y ago
    > Because they could not? The only way they could was to buy it from HP, and that costs money. The money saved on software licensing isn't enough to make the difference if these companies were "desperate" for an alternative. As you pointed out HTC is making Windows Mobile handsets right now and it costs money. (Though again my point on HTC was they'd be pushing WP if they were desperate to get away from Android and they aren't) > B&N customizes Android by cutting down on features to pare it down to a tablet, the requirements are... lower. What features has B&N paired down in the Nook? They've restricted the use of some features but they haven't removed anything that I know of. Meaning what they have done is add a shell on top of Android just as any other manufacturer could do. Even if you buy the argument that it would be harder for Samsung and HTC to adopt webOS feature into a shell you can't argue that it would be harder than switching to an entirely new OS and putting the marketing budget into it to attract development. If that were easy HP would have done it.
    - tewolde 15y ago
      It's all about hedging your bets. Until today, android was the only open source platform these companies could use. This gave Google an advantage to define the rules. For example, they could actually start closing parts of the source or giving Motorola preferential treatment. Google had the sole power to define what an "open" platform was and the rules in using it. Developers, telcos and HW companies now have a second option. HP may not make a dime from this move, but if the move is cheap and it can cost the competition more to respond, then it is a move is well played. Lastly, HP is a hardware/software/services company so this move will give it some leverage when dealing with large players in those areas.
masklinn 15y ago
Samsung has bada already, I don't think they've been desperate for much. HTC, yes. I can see Acer, LG and Sony in that latter category as well.

robbrown451 15y ago

I think HP would benefit if the mobile/tablet landscape was not so dominated and controlled by two of their competitors

steele 15y ago
The fire sale puts them in a decent position against Android.

jnbiche 15y ago

And the upside of Google doing the same to Android was?

mikecane 15y ago
Google gets Google Search on devices. And HP will get ... oops. A piece is missing here.
- mikecane 15y ago
  I figured out the piece: the webOS App Catalog. Keep it going. Future profit justifies webOS continued development.
  - jpxxx 15y ago
    I don't think there's remotely enough money in apps to justify future development. This OS will need hundreds of millions of dollars in development to stay competitive and it's not starting with a userbase of any real size.
    - bmajz 15y ago
      It could be a good way for them to claim "units" of sale vs. Apple since iOS+Mac already has Apple in a strong second in PC sales. There's some face to be saved in being the top PC seller. Oh wait, Apothekar already tried to jettison that.