Why PalmSource May Be Right About Multitasking

[Bob Russell]

Thank you for your post TVoR. And I personally want to thank you for the more polite tone. I've followed some of your other discussions, and while you obviously have a lot of knowledge about these issues and some very interesting things to say, I've also noticed that you have a very animated and spirited style at other sites! That can be a bit too harsh for the friendly discussions we try to foster here at MR, so we greatly appreciate your considerateness concerning the style of your posts here. (It doesn't take much for us to edit or delete a post here if it becomes harsh, because the tone of the discussions is very important to us.)

Originally Posted by Voice_of_Reason

Multitasking is the way of the future because it removes constraints that would otherwise waste a lot of time. The advantages are most apparent in wirelessly connected PDAs, but even unconnected PDAs can benefit from multitasking. The ability to browse the Internet while downloading email, listening to MP3s and copying text at will to a text editor requires "multitasking" (in the simplest meaning of the word). Why would anyone want to do multiple tasks sequentially when they can be done either at the same time or without having to waste time restarting programs?

I think we agree here. It's central to the functioning of advanced devices. But isn't this all stuff that Cobalt can handle?

Originally Posted by Voice_of_Reason

In practice, the ability to quickly switch between apps conferred by having a multitasking OS is the least important advantage over a non-multitasking OS. The difference in ease of app switching between PPC + WisBar and PalmOS + McPhling is arguably rather trivial. Where PalmOS falls flat on its face is in its (dis)ability to perform tasks concurrently. Constantly stopping and starting apps, disconnecting and reconnecting to the Internet, etc. adds a needless burden to the use of a PDA.

I think that we also agree here. In fact, Dianne H had acknowledged that even Cobalt still falls a little short in this area so far because it's the internals that have been the primary focus and the UI improvements that depend on some of that infrastructure is coming next. I'm interested as to why you think the stopping and starting of apps is a burden to the user, though. If programs are written properly, isn't that transparent to the user as long as there are separate threads handling the background work like internet connections?

Originally Posted by Voice_of_Reason

For years I've argued in favor of PalmLinux - a Unix-based platform running Palm apps. Last year Ms. Hackborn berated me on another site for having the temerity to suggest PalmLinux was a good idea. Now it would appear her employer agrees I was right all along. Cobalt is merely a "baby step" in the right direction (towards true multitasking), but Palm/PalmSource has a LOOOONG way to go at this point in time.

A lot has changed over the years. Isn't it to be expected that people with vision are going to see valuable directions before it is safe enough to be right for a company to bet its future on it? I don't know anything about those discussions, but from what I've heard so far, I'm glad that we are headed to Palm for Linux. BTW, I know Dianne personally, and find it hard to believe that she berated you unprovoked! I know there seems to be some history there between the two of you, and that you tend to butt heads here and there, and it's very interesting to see different sides of a discussion, but please remember that all discussions here MUST remain polite! (If I sound a bit paranoid that the discussion might turn ugly, well.... I am! Because I've seen it go that way too much. So just be aware that things have to stay polite here. I don't want to lose out on anyone's thoughts, but I have to insist on politeness. )

Originally Posted by Voice_of_Reason

... The biggest question right now is whether or not PalmSource can solve all of the issues around porting Cobalt to a Linux kernel before their market loses interest completely and moves en masse to an alternate OS. PalmSource has claimed PalmLinux will be ready before mid 2006. I'll believe that when I see it. Because multitasking will soon be an essential OS feature, if Palmsource fails to deliver on its PalmLinux promise it will probably be game over for the platform.

The move to PalmOS for Linux is definitely a challenge for PalmSource. Both making the move and getting devices rolled out with it. It's no walk in the park, but it's something they are committed to, so we'll just have to watch and see how well they execute. That's something that I asked Michael Mace about, and he said that execution is the most important thing for them now as they try to accomplish some significant things in the next few years. And they have to keep their focus and not try to do everything at once with their limited resources. But I really haven't heard them hyping Palm for Linux too much, nor promising any dates. They showed us the roadmap in San Jose, and they made it very clear what was done, in progress, and just projected. They also said it was a roadmap and a plan, not a promise. I don't see any reason to doubt them right now (they seem to have performed pretty well with the move to Garnet and the move to Cobalt, except for the lack of products on the market yet). But whether they roll out Palm for Linux in June 2006 or June 2007 probably doesn't determine the fate of the company. They would lose a lot of momentum and revenue, but I don't know that it's life or death for them as long as the existing Cobalt is viable.

I talked to one of the vendors working on a Cobalt smartphone, and was amazed to hear that it was actually better for them and easier to build the phone on Cobalt than Garnet. Their story was not about all the problems with Cobalt, but how it solved a lot of the problems that they would have had to do themselves if they had used Garnet.

So, yeah, it's a challenge to get to Palm for Linux, but I guess at the moment I'm a believer that they're on track and will get it done.

Originally Posted by Voice_of_Reason

It's interesting to note that PalmSource - a company that supposedly has such UI advantages over PPC - has repeatedly failed to make any improvements to that UI. A tabbed interface (e.g. LauncherX) and rapid app switching (e.g. McPhling) are obvious advances to the PalmOS UI that are still left to third party developers to provide.

Yeah, that may be a bit of a blind spot for PalmSource, but it also goes back to the matter of their focus, I think. UI improvements will pick up soon. Even then, maybe not as fast as we'd like because of the huge market for feature phones that they are also after.

Originally Posted by Voice_of_Reason

It remains to be seen if Palm will even provide an intuitive way to cycle between open threads in Cobalt. I've suggested a customized browser-style tabbed UI, or better yet, showing icons of all open applications on the DIA.

A tabbed UI would be really cool on a T5 or LD, with the bigger screens. But I'm not sure I'd want it on a tiny phone screen. I like the idea of showing the icons of open apps, but again probably only for the larger screen devices. How about simply an icon that brings up a drop-down task/app list, and the option to switch to it or close it if it's still running in the background. Heck, maybe even pretend that recently used apps are still running and also offer to close the ones that aren't even running just so people feel more at home with it!

Originally Posted by Voice_of_Reason

Now we hear talk of an ambitious UI code named "Rome". Why can't PalmSource just fix the bugs and polish its current OSes before heading off on yet another wild goose chase? The lack of focus and praticality that killed Be seems to "Be" rearing its ugly head again...

TVoR

You don't really believe that it makes sense to stop developing and fix all the bugs do you? I work with development teams at my company and we all would love the opportunity to rewrite systems or work on the portions of the app that are the biggest pain in the neck to maintain. But there has to be a real business justification to do something like that. I think that's one of the fortunate things about the work PalmSource is doing on Cobalt and Palm for Linux, because they have apparently had the opportunity to a lot of the kinds of "fixing" you are referring to. It's a rare opportunity, so I hope they took good advantage of it! And, while it may not happen soon, I'm actually kind of excited to hear about the next "wild goose chase", aka "next big thing" from PalmSource. But I'm pretty optimistic, and think it might just be really neat!

I'm curious... you seem to have some significant ties or interest or inside scoop with the BeOS world. Can you share anything about your background that will help us understand where you are coming from?

Thanks again for your thoughts. You're welcome to disagree with everything I've said, but just please be nice!

[hacker]

I'm noticing that some people here are confusing "multitasking" with "multithreaded"... just be careful, they're not the same thing.

In any case, when/if the underlying kernel (now purported to be Linux) supports true multitasking, it only makes sense to allow developers to call the API that exposes those threads in their individual applications if they want to. For those that don't need it, the OS shouldn't enforce the use of it, unless its buried in a transparent API call that handles it automagically.

[hacker]

Originally Posted by Voice_of_Reason

Multitasking is the way of the future because it removes constraints that would otherwise waste a lot of time.

Multitasking isn't THE answer, but it is AN answer to some problems. It can cause more problems than it solves in some cases, depending on your architecture and hardware.

For years I've argued in favor of PalmLinux - a Unix-based platform running Palm apps. Last year Ms. Hackborn berated me on another site for having the temerity to suggest PalmLinux was a good idea. Now it would appear her employer agrees I was right all along.

<smirk> Get in line, I was publically extolling the switch from AMX back in 1997/1998 or so, and at that time, Linux was a viable candidate. Its even moreso now, but it will take quite a lot of development time on their part to make it work right.

I still hope that they don't think their "move to Linux" will somehow garner them thousands of existing Linux and Open Source developers to do their development for them. It just won't happen.

It appears that Cobalt is little more than a glorified beta version of Palm's long overdue saviour: PalmLinux.

Except that it has absolutely nothing at all to do with Linux or the underlying kernel running the device itself.

The biggest question right now is whether or not PalmSource can solve all of the issues around porting Cobalt to a Linux kernel before their market loses interest completely and moves en masse to an alternate OS.

People don't choose their gadgets based on the OS that those gadgets run... they choose their gadgets because it solves a need that they have for the device (playing mp3s, managing PIM data, checking email while away from the office, etc.)

Do you know what version of firmware and what embedded OS your microwave runs? What about your television remote control? Why don't you care? Because they do exactly what is expected of them, without any problems. The only time people need to know what operating system their "Thing" runs, is when things go wrong and they need to fix it or find an alternative solution to solve the problem. When things work, people don't notice them.

People won't "move en masse to an alternate OS" just because Palm doesn't move to Linux. They might consider it when the device stops suiting their needs, but thousands of others who have never used a PDA before will find that Palm suits their needs perfectly.

PalmSource has claimed PalmLinux will be ready before mid 2006. I'll believe that when I see it. Because multitasking will soon be an essential OS feature, if Palmsource fails to deliver on its PalmLinux promise it will probably be game over for the platform.

Sure, and BSD is dead and Apple is switching to Intel... er, ok, maybe not that last one <grin>

Seriously though, the platform won't be dead if their move to Linux doesn't succeed. They have a HUGE growing market in the smartphone and kiosk arena, especially with their recent acquisition in China. Don't be fooled, there are millions of PalmOS licenses being sold per-year, and not just on the devices you can buy at OfficeMax or Staples. Don't forget about the OEMs like Kyocera, Samsung, Sony (yes, still producing PalmOS devices), Acceca, Symbol, and about 2-3 dozen others.

It's interesting to note that PalmSource - a company that supposedly has such UI advantages over PPC - has repeatedly failed to make any improvements to that UI. A tabbed interface (e.g. LauncherX) and rapid app switching (e.g. McPhling) are obvious advances to the PalmOS UI that are still left to third party developers to provide.

That is exactly what has made PalmOS the enormous success that it has been since 1996. That's close to 10 years of PalmOS devices out in the market. Without third-party support, your platform is dead.

Also, lets not forget how much they'd piss off the authors of applications that fit the niche you're suggesting. Let's say that Palm decided to incorporate LauncherX's capabilities into their main launcher (no offense to the author of LauncherX, Bozidar Benc, who died last year), including tabs. What happens to the people who want to buy LauncherX?

The key is to keep the interface as absolutely simple as possible, while keeping the powerful API underneath, exposed via the SDK, so authors can extend the capabilities and create a market for third-party software to keep the device market flourishing. If you piss off your developers by consuming their market, you're going to lose a LOT of users, and a LOT of developers.

Also, there may be patent or licensing issues related to some of the PalmOS applications out there. Just because "Tabs Are Cool" in your opinion, doesn't mean that Palm can just start using them.

It remains to be seen if Palm will even provide an intuitive way to cycle between open threads in Cobalt. I've suggested a customized browser-style tabbed UI, or better yet, showing icons of all open applications on the DIA.

Not everyone likes that approach. Do you have an alternate for those who do not?

Also, stop thinking with a Windows mindset. Not everyone wants a desktop on their PDA. They may think they do, but that's because they're confused about how they access their data. The important thing is their data, their documents, etc. You don't need to port Microsoft Word (and its horribly unusable UI) to a PDA just to view and edit documents. The same thing goes for web browsing, email, calendaring, and so on.

Likewise, you don't need a "Start Bar" or "titlebars" or windowframes or abnormally-large scrollbars, etc. to interact with your data. Look at how much power the iPod put into 1 wheel. With Palm (as with some newer window managers coming out to service embedded devices), applications run modal, with full context, as they should. You shouldn't have a titlebar, unless you can grab it and move the window around. If you can do that on a 320x320 PDA screen, something is wrong, because its a horrible waste of space, resources, and code to allow that behavior.

Simple is best, which is why Palm still controls the majority of this market.

Now we hear talk of an ambitious UI code named "Rome". Why can't PalmSource just fix the bugs and polish its current OSes before heading off on yet another wild goose chase? The lack of focus and praticality that killed Be seems to "Be" rearing its ugly head again...

Now here's a point I think we agree on. I've seen this time and time and time (and time and time) again with USRobotics -> 3Com -> Palm -> Palmsource -> Palm.

Part of the problem is likely due to attrition and turnover. If people keep jumping ship or getting laid off, passing code and projects to others to maintain can get overwhelming and ugly, especially if those people can't code. Look at how Palm jumped on the OSS tools to help embrace their developers, tried to "own" them, and rapidly dumped them when they realized they couldn't (POSE, prc-tools, pilrc and 1/2 dozen others). They're now on their... what... third or fourth kernel rewrite? And lets not even get into Protein, PACE and all of the other alliteration buzzwords that start with "P" here.

[surur]

I noted an interesting fact which Dianne alluded to. It will be possible, under cobalt, to write the whole app (including the GUI) to run as a thread in the background. If this is simple, it would save a programmer a lot of work in the other parts of the program to save state properly and enable messaging between the parts of the program.

Could this be a way to shoe-horn multi-tasking into Cobalt for ALL apps, by hook or by crook?

BTW, I still have not see anybody address the disadvantages of Saved State vs multi-tasking yet. Isn't this what the whole thread is all about?

Surur

[volwrath]

Originally Posted by hacker

Who cares if they're more stable, if they're less functional?

Also, it shouldn't take any "effort" to make something stable. You're a user of the device. It should be stable by default. If it isn't, its broken. Find another vendor.

Are pocketpcs less functional? Methinks not. All one has to do is re-read Alexanders's thread on how he downloads email, rss, and listens to mp3s in the background while he is playing a game of minesweeper.

The problem is Palm didnt have that capability and insisted no-one wanted it. Now that the proof is that people want it (just look at sales), palm is all over it, but cobalt is vaporware, and probably wont comeout.

The only place at this point where palm is aheadand that is the treo 650. That is a verynice machine and the only problem with it is the palmOS

Will PalmLinus fix the problem of having to convert everything to .prc, .pdb from .txt, .doc, .html, etc? That is such a freakin pain...

[doctorow]

I've been a fan of handhelds for the past five years or so and although Windows Mobile devices seem technologically superior, Palm OS devices were always a step ahead in usablity. What happened lately, me thinks, is that PalmOne touched a nerve somewhere by trying to release "new" handhelds in the embodiment of "old" technology. For a while that seemed to work fine; but then even the most die heart Palm fans were wondering if PalmOne wasn't up to the challenge anymore. There was a lot of talk about Cobalt, and yet we still see PalmOne devices using an operation system which core goes back more than seven years.

Is Cobalt vaporware? I don't think so. I think PalmSource is trying hard to do everything right this time! This is not only about finishing and releasing an advanced operation system. It is also about winning new licensees and about losing some of the dependance from PalmOne's major market share among Palm OS devices. PalmSource is a healthy company with lots of resources, and I don't see a reason why they should fail in bringing out an OS that will even make the hearts of WM die hearts beat faster again.

[Voice_of_Reason]

Originally Posted by BobR

Thank you for your post TVoR. And I personally want to thank you for the more polite tone. I've followed some of your other discussions, and while you obviously have a lot of knowledge about these issues and some very interesting things to say, I've also noticed that you have a very animated and spirited style at other sites! That can be a bit too harsh for the friendly discussions we try to foster here at MR, so we greatly appreciate your considerateness concerning the style of your posts here. (It doesn't take much for us to edit or delete a post here if it becomes harsh, because the tone of the discussions is very important to us.)

Harsh? Moi? You must have me confused with some other Voices you're hearing.

Originally Posted by BobR

I think we agree here. It's central to the functioning of advanced devices. But isn't this all stuff that Cobalt can handle?

Possibly. Cobalt can do multithreading. If handled correctly, from a user's perspective this can potentially be almost as good as true multitasking. Depending on the implementation + the resources required of running apps + the resources available, there will be restrictions on what apps can run at the same time. Your buddy, Ms. Hackborn suddenly became silent (unusual for her ) when pressed for details on what Cobalt can really do IN PRACTICE rather than IN THEORY.

Originally Posted by BobR

I think that we also agree here. In fact, Dianne H had acknowledged that even Cobalt still falls a little short in this area so far because it's the internals that have been the primary focus and the UI improvements that depend on some of that infrastructure is coming next. I'm interested as to why you think the stopping and starting of apps is a burden to the user, though. If programs are written properly, isn't that transparent to the user as long as there are separate threads handling the background work like internet connections?

I was actually referring to the inability of PalmOS 5 to perform multitasking.

Originally Posted by BobR

A lot has changed over the years. Isn't it to be expected that people with vision are going to see valuable directions before it is safe enough to be right for a company to bet its future on it? I don't know anything about those discussions, but from what I've heard so far, I'm glad that we are headed to Palm for Linux. BTW, I know Dianne personally, and find it hard to believe that she berated you unprovoked! I know there seems to be some history there between the two of you, and that you tend to butt heads here and there, and it's very interesting to see different sides of a discussion, but please remember that all discussions here MUST remain polite! (If I sound a bit paranoid that the discussion might turn ugly, well.... I am! Because I've seen it go that way too much. So just be aware that things have to stay polite here. I don't want to lose out on anyone's thoughts, but I have to insist on politeness. )

Innovate or die. Palm has failed to innovate over the years, preferring to rest on their laurels. While not spending the money on R + D/thinking ahead saves money in the short term, this "strategy" also leaves a company dead in the water when the market changes. Hardware is slowly catching up to the intrinsic inefficiencies of PPC. On the other hand, hardware bypassed PalmOS way back in 2001. The writing has been on the wall for years, but only recently has Palm started planning for the future. Any company that fails to employ people with vision who's job is to push the envelope is a Dead Company Walking™. And before I get too self-congratulatory about my own visionary skills, in reality anyone who knows anything about PDAs and cellphones could see that PalmLinux was needed at least as far back as in 2000-2001. The problem at that time was limitations of the Linux kernel. I don't think there was even an ARM Linux project for PPC until just a couple years ago. The bottom line is Palm (a.k.a. the "completely separate Palm Companies™") is not some Mom and Pop corner store and has no excuse for the OS stagnation we've seen. They got lazy and greedy selling $400 Palm Vx that cost $50 to make and failed to innovate both their hardware and software. Now they're paying the price.

Ms. Hackborn's savage attack on me was completely unprovoked. I only gently prodded her with a stick once or twice. While she was sleeping.

Please note: I'm always polite.

Originally Posted by BobR

The move to PalmOS for Linux is definitely a challenge for PalmSource. Both making the move and getting devices rolled out with it. It's no walk in the park, but it's something they are committed to, so we'll just have to watch and see how well they execute. That's something that I asked Michael Mace about, and he said that execution is the most important thing for them now as they try to accomplish some significant things in the next few years. And they have to keep their focus and not try to do everything at once with their limited resources. But I really haven't heard them hyping Palm for Linux too much, nor promising any dates. They showed us the roadmap in San Jose, and they made it very clear what was done, in progress, and just projected. They also said it was a roadmap and a plan, not a promise. I don't see any reason to doubt them right now (they seem to have performed pretty well with the move to Garnet and the move to Cobalt, except for the lack of products on the market yet). But whether they roll out Palm for Linux in June 2006 or June 2007 probably doesn't determine the fate of the company. They would lose a lot of momentum and revenue, but I don't know that it's life or death for them as long as the existing Cobalt is viable.

I heard a few people say at DevCon that PalmLinux was expected in the first half of 2006. Here's a copy of the timeline slide from the PowerPoint presentation they gave at DevCon: http://www.palmfocus.com/images/summ...e/img_4978.jpg We're now 18 months after Cobalt was supposedly first unsheathed and there are still no devices shipping with Cobalt. Cobalt has become the spurned beta for PalmLinux. Not too many companies are going to want to pay PalmSource for the "privilege" to become Cobalt beta testers. Meanwhile, PalmOS 5 (FrankenOS™) is collapsing under the weight of all the things it's now being expected to do. Does PalmSource think PalmOS 5 can keep going for another 2 years when PalmLinux is FINALLY ready for prime time?

Originally Posted by BobR

I talked to one of the vendors working on a Cobalt smartphone, and was amazed to hear that it was actually better for them and easier to build the phone on Cobalt than Garnet. Their story was not about all the problems with Cobalt, but how it solved a lot of the problems that they would have had to do themselves if they had used Garnet.

I would hope Cobalt is easier to build a phone around than PalmOS 5! PalmOS 5 is a rickety, hacked-up kludge of an OS that wasn't supposed to still be around. Cobalt has features purpose-built for ease of use in smartphones. I thought this was a well-known fact.

Originally Posted by BobR

So, yeah, it's a challenge to get to Palm for Linux, but I guess at the moment I'm a believer that they're on track and will get it done.

Palm needs more True Believers like you. Just remember: if they wake you up one night offering you Kool-Aid, don't drink it!

Originally Posted by BobR

Yeah, that may be a bit of a blind spot for PalmSource, but it also goes back to the matter of their focus, I think. UI improvements will pick up soon. Even then, maybe not as fast as we'd like because of the huge market for feature phones that they are also after.

To not update the PalmOS UI after 9 years is beyond ridiculous. It's inexcusable that Palm has not bothered to try and improve on Rob Haitani's original UI work. I feel the UI work he and his team at Handspring performed when they hacked creaky old PalmOS 5 into the uber-slick Treo 600 OS is simply astounding. I'd rather have a polished version of the Treo 600 OS running on PDAs with D-pads than any of the subsequent buggy iterations of PalmOS we've seen over the past two years.

Originally Posted by BobR

A tabbed UI would be really cool on a T5 or LD, with the bigger screens. But I'm not sure I'd want it on a tiny phone screen. I like the idea of showing the icons of open apps, but again probably only for the larger screen devices. How about simply an icon that brings up a drop-down task/app list, and the option to switch to it or close it if it's still running in the background. Heck, maybe even pretend that recently used apps are still running and also offer to close the ones that aren't even running just so people feel more at home with it!

Icons on the DIA selectable by a D-pad and McPhling-style pop-up lists could both work well. The key to effective "Zen of Palm" UI design is minimizing the need for extra movements/taps + also minimizing the need for stylus use. The Treo 600 team understood this better than any other set of PDA designers I've ever seen.

Originally Posted by BobR

You don't really believe that it makes sense to stop developing and fix all the bugs do you? I work with development teams at my company and we all would love the opportunity to rewrite systems or work on the portions of the app that are the biggest pain in the neck to maintain. But there has to be a real business justification to do something like that. I think that's one of the fortunate things about the work PalmSource is doing on Cobalt and Palm for Linux, because they have apparently had the opportunity to a lot of the kinds of "fixing" you are referring to. It's a rare opportunity, so I hope they took good advantage of it! And, while it may not happen soon, I'm actually kind of excited to hear about the next "wild goose chase", aka "next big thing" from PalmSource. But I'm pretty optimistic, and think it might just be really neat!

Ummm... what's the point of putting out buggy, half-baked software and then rushing to put out a new version with more features before you've corrected bugs? Microsoft has been doing that sort of nonsense for years and we all pay the price for that corporate "strategy". It's a shame to see Palm adopting the same sloppy way releasing and supporting their products. I'd rather see an intuitive, efficient PalmOS that does a few things REALLY well than a bloated, buggy, ill-conceived mess that has a ton of incompletely-developed features. PalmOS is starting to sound more and more like PPC these days...

Originally Posted by BobR

I'm curious... you seem to have some significant ties or interest or inside scoop with the BeOS world. Can you share anything about your background that will help us understand where you are coming from?

Thanks again for your thoughts. You're welcome to disagree with everything I've said, but just please be nice!

You mean like am I a jilted/fired former Be employee? Was I once spurned by Dianne at a Be connference? Does Pépé Gassée owe me money from a bar bet from 1998? Am I a former Be investor that lost their shirt when Gassée got greedy and turned down the generous mega-deal Apple offered to get BeOS as the next-generation MacOS? Ummmmm... no.

TVoR

[Voice_of_Reason]

Originally Posted by hacker

Multitasking isn't THE answer, but it is AN answer to some problems. It can cause more problems than it solves in some cases, depending on your architecture and hardware.

Yes, but if implemented correctly multitasking is always the best option.

Originally Posted by hacker

<smirk> Get in line, I was publically extolling the switch from AMX back in 1997/1998 or so, and at that time, Linux was a viable candidate. Its even moreso now, but it will take quite a lot of development time on their part to make it work right.

Well I first spoke of PalmLinux July 1, 1996. Can you beat that, Homeboy? Bring it on!

Originally Posted by hacker

I still hope that they don't think their "move to Linux" will somehow garner them thousands of existing Linux and Open Source developers to do their development for them. It just won't happen.

True. But PalmSource seems naive enough to believe it will. "PalmLinux will save us. I know it will."

Originally Posted by hacker

Except that it has absolutely nothing at all to do with Linux or the underlying kernel running the device itself.

Except that almost everthing in Cobalt above the Cobalt kernel is expected to be used in PalmLinux. Nice try, Bubba.

Originally Posted by hacker

People don't choose their gadgets based on the OS that those gadgets run... they choose their gadgets because it solves a need that they have for the device (playing mp3s, managing PIM data, checking email while away from the office, etc.)

Yes, and when those gadgets can't do things (like multitask) that everyone else's gadgets can do, they choose the more competitive gadgets.

Originally Posted by hacker

Do you know what version of firmware and what embedded OS your microwave runs? What about your television remote control? Why don't you care? Because they do exactly what is expected of them, without any problems. The only time people need to know what operating system their "Thing" runs, is when things go wrong and they need to fix it or find an alternative solution to solve the problem. When things work, people don't notice them.

See previous response.

Originally Posted by hacker

People won't "move en masse to an alternate OS" just because Palm doesn't move to Linux. They might consider it when the device stops suiting their needs, but thousands of others who have never used a PDA before will find that Palm suits their needs perfectly.

See previous response.

Originally Posted by hacker

Sure, and BSD is dead and Apple is switching to Intel... er, ok, maybe not that last one <grin>

Stranger things have happened. Some people even say Michael Jackson might win his court case!

Originally Posted by hacker

Seriously though, the platform won't be dead if their move to Linux doesn't succeed. They have a HUGE growing market in the smartphone and kiosk arena, especially with their recent acquisition in China. Don't be fooled, there are millions of PalmOS licenses being sold per-year, and not just on the devices you can buy at OfficeMax or Staples. Don't forget about the OEMs like Kyocera, Samsung, Sony (yes, still producing PalmOS devices), Acceca, Symbol, and about 2-3 dozen others.

As soon as a platform/app/company loses momentum, the smell of death is upon it. It's very difficult to reverse a downward spiral unless a company is either a) very lucky or b) has leadership ***COUGH Steve Jobs COUGH*** capable of creating a cult-like following for its products. Anyone remember Netscape? Wordperfect? K-Mart?

Originally Posted by hacker

That is exactly what has made PalmOS the enormous success that it has been since 1996. That's close to 10 years of PalmOS devices out in the market. Without third-party support, your platform is dead.

There comes a time when a mature company has to start absorbing what third party vendors do into its own product. It's called evolving.

Originally Posted by hacker

Also, lets not forget how much they'd piss off the authors of applications that fit the niche you're suggesting. Let's say that Palm decided to incorporate LauncherX's capabilities into their main launcher (no offense to the author of LauncherX, Bozidar Benc, who died last year), including tabs. What happens to the people who want to buy LauncherX?

Tough. The world isn't perfect, is it? Those were the same (weak) excuses Palm used for years as justification for not spending a dime to improve PalmOS. Then they bought MultiMail and licensed Desktop To Go. Did users complain? And last I checked, SnapperMail, Quickoffice, etc were all being sold, while weaker apps were falling by the wayside. Survival of the fittest, Baby! Darwin was right after all. Wow. Maybe Microsoft knows what they're doing by absorbing the leading 3rd party apps into the Microsoft Collective year after year. Resistance is futile™...

Originally Posted by hacker

The key is to keep the interface as absolutely simple as possible, while keeping the powerful API underneath, exposed via the SDK, so authors can extend the capabilities and create a market for third-party software to keep the device market flourishing. If you piss off your developers by consuming their market, you're going to lose a LOT of users, and a LOT of developers.

Bull. See previous response. The key is a clean, simple, POWERFUL, FLEXIBLE interface. Rob Haitani understands this. PalmSource apparently feels UI is a low priority. (Oh, I forgot - "Rome" will fix everything! Guess what? Rome wasn't built in a day...) By the way, most users don't give a rat's arse about developers. All they want is to be able to do everything they need to do as easily as possible for as little money as possible. Scouring the Internet for the top apps/utilities in an effort to optimize their PDA is not the typical user's idea of fun. Palm seems oblivious to this fact.

Originally Posted by hacker

Also, there may be patent or licensing issues related to some of the PalmOS applications out there. Just because "Tabs Are Cool" in your opinion, doesn't mean that Palm can just start using them.

PalmSource would not lose a lawsuit over a tabbed interface or icons on a DIA. Has it come down to this now? Avoid improving your product out of fear of being sued? Please.

Originally Posted by hacker

Not everyone likes that approach. Do you have an alternate for those who do not?

Easy. Give users the option to choose which interface they prefer. Pick up a TH55 or VZ90 to get a feel for how flexible UI can be in the same device.

Originally Posted by hacker

Also, stop thinking with a Windows mindset. Not everyone wants a desktop on their PDA. They may think they do, but that's because they're confused about how they access their data. The important thing is their data, their documents, etc. You don't need to port Microsoft Word (and its horribly unusable UI) to a PDA just to view and edit documents. The same thing goes for web browsing, email, calendaring, and so on.

Likewise, you don't need a "Start Bar" or "titlebars" or windowframes or abnormally-large scrollbars, etc. to interact with your data. Look at how much power the iPod put into 1 wheel. With Palm (as with some newer window managers coming out to service embedded devices), applications run modal, with full context, as they should. You shouldn't have a titlebar, unless you can grab it and move the window around. If you can do that on a 320x320 PDA screen, something is wrong, because its a horrible waste of space, resources, and code to allow that behavior.

No one said anything about Windows. Tabs are not exactly a concept unique to Windows - as anyone with a filing cabinet can tell you. It's sad to see Microsoft-haters pretend that just because a design concept is used by a Microsoft product, suddenly it becomes Evil Incarnate.

Originally Posted by hacker

Simple is best, which is why Palm still controls the majority of this market.

Are you really sure "Palm still controls the majority of this market"?

http://www.palminfocenter.com/commen...ID=7788#106629

Originally Posted by hacker

Now here's a point I think we agree on. I've seen this time and time and time (and time and time) again with USRobotics -> 3Com -> Palm -> Palmsource -> Palm.

Reinventing the wheel continues to hurt PalmSource. Only now they've run out of both time and money. At least when PalmSource is bought out by Palm/pa1mOne next year they'll have more time to mess around shining sh*t.

Originally Posted by hacker

Part of the problem is likely due to attrition and turnover. If people keep jumping ship or getting laid off, passing code and projects to others to maintain can get overwhelming and ugly, especially if those people can't code. Look at how Palm jumped on the OSS tools to help embrace their developers, tried to "own" them, and rapidly dumped them when they realized they couldn't (POSE, prc-tools, pilrc and 1/2 dozen others). They're now on their... what... third or fourth kernel rewrite? And lets not even get into Protein, PACE and all of the other alliteration buzzwords that start with "P" here.

Don't get me started. I wish someone could tattoo the words "Keep It Simple, Stupid" on every former Be/PalmSource employee's forehead. Then maybe they'd think twice before trying to come up with yet another harebrained Rube Goldberg-style "solution".

TVoR

[Voice_of_Reason]

Originally Posted by hacker

Seriously though, the platform won't be dead if their move to Linux doesn't succeed. They have a HUGE growing market in the smartphone and kiosk arena, especially with their recent acquisition in China. Don't be fooled, there are millions of PalmOS licenses being sold per-year, and not just on the devices you can buy at OfficeMax or Staples. Don't forget about the OEMs like Kyocera, Samsung, Sony (yes, still producing PalmOS devices), Acceca, Symbol, and about 2-3 dozen others.

Looks like the numbers don't back you up, Bubba. Besides from pa1mOne, it appears that not a lot of PalmOS devices are being sold these days.

http://www.palminfocenter.com/commen...ID=7788#106637

And if you think China will save Palm, guess again. Ask yourself just how many American companies have been allowed to make money in that repressive Communist country. Palm will just get USED by China just like every other company that has gone over there wide eyed, drooling over the potential of access to a billion person market, only to return after being taken for a ride, Beijing-style.

[Bob Russell]

Okay, okay. We can argue about the numbers all day. And maybe another thread for that might be fun to do. But in this one, let's try to stick a bit closer to the multitasking/multithreaded discussion, please.

It sounds like part of the argument from TVoR is that PalmSource can't deliver on Palm for Linux in the timeframe that's planned, and that they have not implemented proper multitasking, a decent modern UI, or resolved their existing software issues yet, and that unless they make some strides forward remembering "simplicity first" for the user experience, the market will slip away, and might even be slipping away now depending on what numbers you read.

Those are all points that can be discussed and probably would create a lot of interest, but I think it's way too much to tackle in a single thread, so let's try to focus on the multi-tasking and application switching in this thread. I'm with surur...

BTW, I still have not see anybody address the disadvantages of Saved State vs multi-tasking yet. Isn't this what the whole thread is all about?

The only things that have been suggested as disadvantages of saved state that I'm aware of are: 1) It might be harder to develop under that paradigm, and 2) If not done right by developers, it damages the user experience.

And an advantage of the PalmOS approach is that you don't waste the system resources running multiple applications when you don't need to.

But I haven't seen anything that really indicates to me that there's all that much advantage on either side of the fence...

[TadW]

Heading back to the multitasking/state-saving discussion. surur mentioned this a few posts before and he was very right: we are not any longer talking about Motorola Dragonball 33Mhz CPUs here. We are now talking about the 5th generation of the ARM microarchitecture - more precisely Intel's XScale processor, which includes support for superfast multitasking (i.e. context switching) and multimedia environments.

It seems some people still believe that multitasking apps are a waste of resources. Totally unwarranted, I may add. There is a shareware tool called Supertasks 2.0 for Pocket PCs which depicts CPU consumption of individual tasks, processes and even services. You'll see, if you try it, that even if you run ten applications at once, including an mp3 audioplayer and some Internet-based downloads, that with a standard XScale 416 MHz CPU, no process is using more than 4-5% total CPU.

So to all multitasking naysayers: what is the benefit of state-saving and giving a process 100% of available CPU resources if that process won't be using more than 4-5% of it?

[Laurens]

The drawback to multitasking is that applications have to compete for memory usage. You don't have a swapfile to flush unused memory pages to, like you have on the desktop. That said, if a process really uses so much memory that this becomes a problem, it's probably not suitable to run on a handheld in the first place.

[TadW]

Originally Posted by Laurens

The drawback to multitasking is that applications have to compete for memory usage.

True, but that shouldn't be a problem anymore. The Palm V had 2MB Ram and Flash and didn't offer multitasking. The Tungsten T5 has a whopping 256 MB of total memory (which includes the user-accessible RAM and Flash), and still doesn't offer multitasking.

All I am saying is that as hardware develops and opens up to new possibilities, we shouldn't be arguing that software technology that dates back almost a decade is still preferable to newer technology.

[Laurens]

Originally Posted by TadW

True, but that shouldn't be a problem anymore. The Palm V had 2MB Ram and Flash and didn't offer multitasking. The Tungsten T5 has a whopping 256 MB of total memory (which includes the user-accessible RAM and Flash), and still doesn't offer multitasking.

Agreed. I was just pointing out a drawback to multitasking, not arguing for or against it. Incidentally, Windows CE allows an application to use up to 32Mb of memory, so MS did take memory usage into consideration.

[surur]

I have not heard of this 32Mb limit in win CE. I have personally loaded some very large web pages (e.g. photo-shop contests) which used >50MB.



Surur