5 ms·

HP was definitely in a position to compete with apple, and always has been. They might not have been in a position to beat them, but you don't have to be on t

HP was definitely in a position to compete with apple, and always has been. They might not have been in a position to beat them, but you don't have to be on top to be profitable.

FirmwareBurner 1y ago
>HP was definitely in a position to compete with apple, and always has been. In 1990-2000? Sure, maybe. In 2010? Not a chance. HP was not a SW company like Apple. Apple wasn't making much money from selling Macs in 2001. Their big cash cow came from the iPod which HP couldn't pull off something like iTunes and licensing deals with record labels, they were just a commodity HW company (ignoring the oscilloscope, sensors, medical and the other shit). >They might not have been in a position to beat them, but you don't have to be on top to be profitable. From where I am, I saw clear as day that markets usually have room for only two large players who will end up owning 90% of the market, with the rest of the players fighting for the scraps. Intel & AMD, Nvidia & AMD, iOS & Android, PlayStation & Xbox, Apple & Samsung, Windows & Mac, etc, HP was in no position to win against Apple and Google for a podium spot so they left in due time. Even Microsoft couldn't pull it off.
- bee_rider 1y ago
  I agree. OEMs have always been weird because in some sense consumers attribute the computers to them. But they don’t have a core competency in software. And they don’t have a core competency in the hardest parts of hardware—chip design, etc. Picking the right parts to buy, assembling them, shipping them, that’s all important stuff. They weren’t in a position to win against Apple; they were playing one of the three games Apple plays, almost as well as Apple.
  - bluGill 1y ago
    HP did have competency in a lot of those areas though. They were a large company that did have fingers in a lot of different things, both software and hardware. Their PCs were visible, but they had lots of other divisions doing lots of things.
    - cogman10 1y ago
      Which was perhaps their major issue. The HP expertise was all over the place with divisions around the globe reinventing the wheel. Couple that with a recently decimated and outsourced IT department (Such a colossally dumb decision) and you could effectively see HP not as one company but 100 companies all doing their own thing.
- coredog64 1y ago
  Circa 2005, HP did a licensing deal with Apple to sell their own iPod Photo.
paxys 1y ago
By 2011 Apple had launched iPhone 4s, Android manufacturers had sold 100M phones, and HP's latest and greatest mobile device looked like this - https://fdn2.gsmarena.com/vv/pics/hp/hp-ipaq-glisten-1.jpg https://fdn2.gsmarena.com/vv/pics/hp/hp-ipaq-glisten-1.jpg. They simply had been asleep at the wheel for too long. And even then, the correct move would have been to adopt Android instead of thinking you could build and control your own ecosystem (something they finally did in 2014).
- phonon 1y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_Veer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_Veer and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_Pre_3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_Pre_3 could have been great, if they had been well supported.
- bluGill 1y ago
  In early 2011 when I told people I had an Android they had no clue what I was talking about. A well done long term investment in other phones could have made a big difference - but HP wasn't willing to make it so we will never know. (Microsoft released their Windows phone in 2012, again killing it before it took off).
  - thaumasiotes 1y ago
    > Microsoft released their Windows phone in 2012, again killing it before it took off That 2011 iPAQ has a Windows button. Wikipedia lists them as running "Windows Mobile".
    - bluGill 1y ago
      I may remember my dates wrong... Close enough for this discussion though.
      - thaumasiotes 1y ago
        No, I think you're right. Wikipedia suggests that "Windows Phone" (the operating system) came out the following year, replacing Windows Mobile.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

HP was definitely in a position to compete with apple, and always has been. They might not have been in a position to beat them, but you don't have to be on top to be profitable.

FirmwareBurner 1y ago

>HP was definitely in a position to compete with apple, and always has been. In 1990-2000? Sure, maybe. In 2010? Not a chance. HP was not a SW company like Apple. Apple wasn't making much money from selling Macs in 2001. Their big cash cow came from the iPod which HP couldn't pull off something like iTunes and licensing deals with record labels, they were just a commodity HW company (ignoring the oscilloscope, sensors, medical and the other shit). >They might not have been in a position to beat them, but you don't have to be on top to be profitable. From where I am, I saw clear as day that markets usually have room for only two large players who will end up owning 90% of the market, with the rest of the players fighting for the scraps. Intel & AMD, Nvidia & AMD, iOS & Android, PlayStation & Xbox, Apple & Samsung, Windows & Mac, etc, HP was in no position to win against Apple and Google for a podium spot so they left in due time. Even Microsoft couldn't pull it off.

bee_rider 1y ago
I agree. OEMs have always been weird because in some sense consumers attribute the computers to them. But they don’t have a core competency in software. And they don’t have a core competency in the hardest parts of hardware—chip design, etc. Picking the right parts to buy, assembling them, shipping them, that’s all important stuff. They weren’t in a position to win against Apple; they were playing one of the three games Apple plays, almost as well as Apple.
- bluGill 1y ago
  HP did have competency in a lot of those areas though. They were a large company that did have fingers in a lot of different things, both software and hardware. Their PCs were visible, but they had lots of other divisions doing lots of things.
  - cogman10 1y ago
    Which was perhaps their major issue. The HP expertise was all over the place with divisions around the globe reinventing the wheel. Couple that with a recently decimated and outsourced IT department (Such a colossally dumb decision) and you could effectively see HP not as one company but 100 companies all doing their own thing.
coredog64 1y ago
Circa 2005, HP did a licensing deal with Apple to sell their own iPod Photo.

paxys 1y ago

By 2011 Apple had launched iPhone 4s, Android manufacturers had sold 100M phones, and HP's latest and greatest mobile device looked like this - https://fdn2.gsmarena.com/vv/pics/hp/hp-ipaq-glisten-1.jpg https://fdn2.gsmarena.com/vv/pics/hp/hp-ipaq-glisten-1.jpg. They simply had been asleep at the wheel for too long. And even then, the correct move would have been to adopt Android instead of thinking you could build and control your own ecosystem (something they finally did in 2014).

phonon 1y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_Veer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_Veer and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_Pre_3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_Pre_3 could have been great, if they had been well supported.
bluGill 1y ago
In early 2011 when I told people I had an Android they had no clue what I was talking about. A well done long term investment in other phones could have made a big difference - but HP wasn't willing to make it so we will never know. (Microsoft released their Windows phone in 2012, again killing it before it took off).
- thaumasiotes 1y ago
  > Microsoft released their Windows phone in 2012, again killing it before it took off That 2011 iPAQ has a Windows button. Wikipedia lists them as running "Windows Mobile".
  - bluGill 1y ago
    I may remember my dates wrong... Close enough for this discussion though.
    - thaumasiotes 1y ago
      No, I think you're right. Wikipedia suggests that "Windows Phone" (the operating system) came out the following year, replacing Windows Mobile.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]