Proprietary!!

[jjesusfreak01]

Many people have critisised Sony over the years of making handhelds that did not work with anything because they are proprietary. The truth is that Palm handhelds did this too, but because more of their handhelds are around, the developers are more inclined to create programs that operate correctly with them.

There has recently been a large shift in this philosophy, as the newest Palm handheld, the T5, is inoperable with many mainstream programs. The other part of the shift, is that the newest Sony devices, the TH-55 and VZ-90, include proprietary peripherals, but work with most of the mainstream programs around.

We know that most software developers will release fixes for the T5, and Palm knows this. Then why do they make bad handhelds? Because they know that they can get away with it. They know that the developers will fix their programs, and the clout that Palm holds is again clearly evident.

[GadgetGuru]

But if they make it too bad on developers, they will just shift platforms and go Pocket PC. And software sells devices... Palmsource really need to stamp their mark on the operating system and comes up with STANDARDS. Developers shouldn't need to fiddle with their software to make multiple versions just to make it run across all devices.

Developers nowadays needs to make their software compatible with:
1. Low-res devices
2. Tungsten T/T2: and its small heap
3. OS4/Dragonball CPU
4. High-Res + (MOstly optional)
5. Sony High-Res for OS4
6. If with sounds, Sony proprietary API( if that's possible)
7. Tungsten T5 compatible

Too many things to consider, you code a program and then run itbthrough MULTIPLE simulators. What? With PPC, mostly you code once and it runs on most devices. And Palmsource consider its operating system more elegant? Maybe, but this fragmentation gonna cost them!!

[that70sGAdawg]

I agree, but you left one one thing: Sony is gone from the US. Not going to be a factor moving forward. Leaving only PalmOne, Tapwave, & Garmin? That leaves not so perfect PalmOne to supply the masses with a Palm OS device. It's sad, because I hate to see Microsoft swallow up another market with products that are worse than PalmOnes with "issues". Even microsoft has showed signs of only pushing real development in their Smartphone line, and disappoints their PDA faithful by leaving out important upgrades and having "alarm bugs" with their new OS's. Software developer have to addess the market that pays - Right now that would be Palm OS followed closely by Pocket PC. Palms OS has changed, they have to adapt their software or change markets.
I have had Smartphones, Pocket PC Phone editions, Treos, and a Sprint /Palm i500 and they all have to cut some high end features to make a combo device. I will now carry both a phone & PDA until someone can provide an un compromised product.

[GadgetGuru]

Palmsource need someone with a vision to head it. It should stamped it's vision. It should test its licensee's device and make sure they adhere to that vision. If Palmsource is not sleeping, it would not have allowed T5 to market without a few more enhancements. Granted that the T5 is not as bad as initial reports indicate, there are still a few bugs that taint the whole user experience. The whole debacle is a fault of Palmsource as it is of PalmOne. In the end, I fault PalmSource more for letting its OS defragment.

PalmSource need to have a long term vision. Why make a 64MB RAM limit (on OS5) in the first place. Do you think that no dvice will ever need that much. That's short sightedness. And some say that Cobalt will have a 256MB limit, you better start revising that. And why does you need limits in the first place. You should have make the operating system scalable, in terms of CPU power, RAM sizes, screen sizes, etc. Since you are basically rewriting the OS for OS 6, those things should have been done in the first place if only the one in charge has the vision.

Also, the company should not look outside the company to supply it with critical software!!! it just drains your resources. The web browser for example: Why does Palmsource has to relie on Netfront when it could have just ported over Be's NetPositive ? Why pay royalty to NetFront for each copy of OS sold? Same with Real player or Versamail. Some portions like Blackberry compatibility are proprietary and it's right to license them from others but some doesn't need to be.

It also have to actively pursue licensees not wait for them to come. Palmsource should wake up!!! So should PalmOne!!!

To PalmOne: while high-end devices are not huge sellers, they add prestige to the brand, and they are the choice of IT heads and power users who makes decisions at the enterprise level.