HP: WebOS devices are dead

[lothar]

What clueless fucks are running HP, anyway? I say this as someone who doesn't think webOS is all that like some people do, but it had a TON of potential.

Leo Apothinker that is.
HPQ has been a shitty company since Mark Hurd left. :thumbsdown:

 

[Cogman]

Leo Apothinker that is.
HPQ has been a shitty company since Mark Hurd left. :thumbsdown:

Mark Hurd is the reason HPQ became a shitty company. They are still trying to recover from the damage he did.

 

[alent1234]

I'd add that going Sprint exclusive with the Pre was one of the dumbest business moves ever. Google got away with launching the G1 on Tmobile because they new that was just a practice launch. When they wanted a real launch they went to Verizon. At the time the Pre was released Palm new they needed a home run to save the company. There was no chance of getting that home run on Sprint no matter how good the product was.

sprint was a beta launch since they needed a smartphone at the time. the software was unfinished and verizon wouldn't touch it in its current state

the fact that they announced the pre early in the year and didn't let anyone touch it for months showed it was a hyped up beta launch. even the idiotic youtube unboxing videos didn't show it off doing anything because the software wasn't ready. it was all just marketing hype because palm announced it too early.

when people finally got their hands on it there were all kinds of problems including a beta development kit that was flaky at best and palm had some idiotic dev program rules

by the time the verizon launch came the iphone 3GS had been out for months and was a huge hit and the original Droid had been out for a few months as well

 

[alent1234]

Ready for the conspiracy theory?

Apple killed HP.

It sucked away high end sales with it's notebooks and desktops.

It delayed the purchase of replacement laptops because people bought an iPad and decided to use the old laptop/desktop for another year or two since they work ok.

And the iPad has become the iPod (when people talk about a tablet, they mean iPad)

I know the sales figures show Android has 30% of the tablet market, but Gruber had an excellent piece about how those numbers are very misleading, by talking about the tablets in the sales channel versus those actually sold. All of the iPads are actually sold versus the Android tablets in the sales channel (250,000 unsold TouchPads for Best Buy alone ring a bell? All those massive tablet price cuts and discounts? Hell, THE BEST Android tablet was on eBay as a daily deal yesterday).

this

even a few years ago when apple was selling less than 10% of the computers out there they had some ridiculous high dollar share of the profits. around 40%. now i think it's around 60% if you don't include the ipads. almost everyone who buys a computer where the maker is going to make a nice profit off it is buying a mac. dell/hp and the chinese makers are selling their computers at margins that are less than in the food business.

HP and dell have enterprise businesses that make some money and they give away their computers for free like coke does to the supermarket chains

i had a work issued HP laptop a few years back and will never buy an expensive HP laptop. but i wouldn't lose sleep over spending $1100 on the 13" MBP. i just need a laptop to hold my photos, some kids movies and itunes collection and do some simple photo editing. i use my ipad and android phone a lot more than i do my laptop

 

[MrX8503]

Looks like HP is dropping out of WebOS AND PCs. lol, this is nuts.

 

[Pliablemoose]

this

i had a work issued HP laptop a few years back and will never buy an expensive HP laptop. but i wouldn't lose sleep over spending $1100 on the 13" MBP. i just need a laptop to hold my photos, some kids movies and itunes collection and do some simple photo editing. i use my ipad and android phone a lot more than i do my laptop

HP has to sell 7 systems to Apple's 1 to equal the profits made.

 

[Genx87]

That was quick. Palm has been irrelevant for years. This just ends another example of a pioneering company losing touch with the market and shitting away their fortunes. Next up is RIM.

 

[Fox5]

HP has to sell 7 systems to Apple's 1 to equal the profits made.

Equally apple's profits shouldn't have been the goal.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Equally apple's profits shouldn't have been the goal.

Why not?

These mega corporations aren't charities.

 

[mosco]

I'd add that going Sprint exclusive with the Pre was one of the dumbest business moves ever. Google got away with launching the G1 on Tmobile because they new that was just a practice launch. When they wanted a real launch they went to Verizon. At the time the Pre was released Palm new they needed a home run to save the company. There was no chance of getting that home run on Sprint no matter how good the product was.

Not to mention the horrible advertising that they did with Sprint.

 

[boomhower]

Google jumped the gun with Motorola. Me thinks there must be some mighty good patents in the Palm portfolio considering that there have been no big lawsuits thrown HP's way. Sure, Palm didn't have a lot to sue for but once HP bought them they became a nice target. Samsung, HTC, or Google will buy it for the IP.

 

[lothar]

Mark Hurd is the reason HPQ became a shitty company. They are still trying to recover from the damage he did.

Yes...It was Mark Hurd's fault that Leo Apotheker released WebOS and cancelled it 7 weeks later.

Mark Hurd generated lots of cash for his shareholders. I sold my shares the same week he was fired.
What damage did Mark Hurd do HPQ?
As far as am aware, he increased company guidance and beat earnings expectations for almost every single quarter for more than 5 years.
HP was a cash printing machine when Hurd was there. Now, it's not.

Compare that to Leo Apotheker, who didn't exactly do a good job at SAP.

 

[lothar]

Google jumped the gun with Motorola. Me thinks there must be some mighty good patents in the Palm portfolio considering that there have been no big lawsuits thrown HP's way. Sure, Palm didn't have a lot to sue for but once HP bought them they became a nice target. Samsung, HTC, or Google will buy it for the IP.

That's only because HP never made any money with WebOS.

You don't understand how patent troll companies work, do you?

 

[goog40]

This article is pretty interesting, HP loaded webOS onto an iPad and found that webOS runs over twice as fast on an iPad versus a TouchPad.

http://thenextweb.com/apple/2011/08/19/hp-tested-webos-on-an-ipad-it-ran-over-twice-as-fast/

 

[Sheep]

Why not?

These mega corporations aren't charities.

Because almost no companies have Apple's marketing mojo and cult following. If all of Apple's competitors were to try and use Apple's profits as a model and run their businesses solely to match that margin, the vast majority of them would be out of commission in a few years since that's simply not a realistic business model. There's room out there for more than premium-priced, aspirational products.

 

[poofyhairguy]

HP has to sell 7 systems to Apple's 1 to equal the profits made.

That makes sense, and it is something HP can't replicate.

Why?

Well I sold over a million dollars of personal PCs at HP's big competitor (Dell) and I know for a fact that pretty much everyone came to me "because they had to." Multiple times a day I would try to convince someone to buy the high-end XPS systems (as they are higher margin) and the response always was "If I had $1000 to spend on a computer I would just buy a Mac!"

Mac has become known as the premium computer line. Like a luxury car it is the type of thing people dream about having one day.

Most computers sold by places like HP and Dell as sub-$600 laptops and desktops with almost no margin. Dell told us they tried real hard to push higher-end systems like the XPS in their marketing, but consumers already associated Dell with being "a cheap computer" which is the exact same market HP is stuck in.

 

[foghorn67]

This article is pretty interesting, HP loaded webOS onto an iPad and found that webOS runs over twice as fast on an iPad versus a TouchPad.

http://thenextweb.com/apple/2011/08/19/hp-tested-webos-on-an-ipad-it-ran-over-twice-as-fast/

I question the veracity of this article. They incorrectly said the tablet has a single core processor.

 

[dennilfloss]

Ha! I'm a Pre owner who's currently considering buying an XPS 17 to upgrade from my Thinkpad A21e (Celeron 600, 256MB RAM, 10GB HDD) and buying a Mac would never cross my mind.

 

[alent1234]

That makes sense, and it is something HP can't replicate.

Why?

Well I sold over a million dollars of personal PCs at HP's big competitor (Dell) and I know for a fact that pretty much everyone came to me "because they had to." Multiple times a day I would try to convince someone to buy the high-end XPS systems (as they are higher margin) and the response always was "If I had $1000 to spend on a computer I would just buy a Mac!"

Mac has become known as the premium computer line. Like a luxury car it is the type of thing people dream about having one day.

Most computers sold by places like HP and Dell as sub-$600 laptops and desktops with almost no margin. Dell told us they tried real hard to push higher-end systems like the XPS in their marketing, but consumers already associated Dell with being "a cheap computer" which is the exact same market HP is stuck in.

not only that but i can walk into an apple store with a problem and talk to someone who speaks normal american english and be out faster than i'd be on a phone queue with dell or hp

and Mac's don't have 10 different programs starting on boot up with flashing buy me notifications to upgrade past the pre-installed trial version

 

[Cogman]

Yes...It was Mark Hurd's fault that Leo Apotheker released WebOS and cancelled it 7 weeks later.

Mark Hurd generated lots of cash for his shareholders. I sold my shares the same week he was fired.
What damage did Mark Hurd do HPQ?

All the gains from Hurd were short term. He hacked and slashed away the good developers, engineers, and managers to make the company look more profitable and well run. He cut down the "expensive" employees who just so happened to be the most talented ones. This looks great in the short run, but is disastrous long term.

As far as am aware, he increased company guidance and beat earnings expectations for almost every single quarter for more than 5 years.
HP was a cash printing machine when Hurd was there. Now, it's not.

Compare that to Leo Apotheker, who didn't exactly do a good job at SAP.

I'm not saying that Leo is doing a great job. The webOS stuff was short sighted at best. But I am saying that Leo has a pretty rotten hand. It doesn't help that Hurd is still trying to destroy HP from the outside (See oracle pulling support for itanium processors).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Hurd

Hurd's management style was basically, take away all the resources from your employees and hope that they can still do the same job. Yes, it makes the company less expensive, but ultimately it does A LOT of damage.

 

[alent1234]

Ha! I'm a Pre owner who's currently considering buying an XPS 17 to upgrade from my Thinkpad A21e (Celeron 600, 256MB RAM, 10GB HDD) and buying a Mac would never cross my mind.

too bad most computer users in the market for an expensive computer are going to buy a Mac because don't want to deal with crapware or wiping the system manually and reinstalling everything themselves

and the fact that you need a mac to develop for iOS means that most developers developing mobile applications are doing it on mac's

unless you're buying a base model it's $1788 to make it comparable to a 17" MBP. plus tax is over $1900. i can buy a 17" MBP through an apple reseller for $2230 with no sales tax. the resale value alone will make up for the price difference. not to mention the better support and out of the box experience

 

[alent1234]

All the gains from Hurd were short term. He hacked and slashed away the good developers, engineers, and managers to make the company look more profitable and well run. He cut down the "expensive" employees who just so happened to be the most talented ones. This looks great in the short run, but is disastrous long term.



I'm not saying that Leo is doing a great job. The webOS stuff was short sighted at best. But I am saying that Leo has a pretty rotten hand. It doesn't help that Hurd is still trying to destroy HP from the outside (See oracle pulling support for itanium processors).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Hurd

Hurd's management style was basically, take away all the resources from your employees and hope that they can still do the same job. Yes, it makes the company less expensive, but ultimately it does A LOT of damage.

that's because so much of what HP does is just reselling someone else's products with your own branding or it's a commodity like a server. even with servers they now have to pull stunts like licensing RAID controller features to make money

Windows and linux doesn't really care if you run it on HP, dell or ibm. HP is like a giant QA department that takes other companies' products, tests them to make sure they work together and then resells it under their brand name.

few years back we used to buy Emulex brand HBA's. one time i was updating the HP drivers on a server and by accident overwrote the Emulex driver with the HP one. no one ever noticed. in fact when we started buying HP branded emulex HBA's they still say Emulex on them.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Ha! I'm a Pre owner who's currently considering buying an XPS 17 to upgrade from my Thinkpad A21e (Celeron 600, 256MB RAM, 10GB HDD) and buying a Mac would never cross my mind.

You decided to share this with us in a thread about HP killing WebOS?

OT/SFF Laptops is ------->

 

[gsaldivar]

Ha! I'm a Pre owner who's currently considering buying an XPS 17 to upgrade from my Thinkpad A21e (Celeron 600, 256MB RAM, 10GB HDD) and buying a Mac would never cross my mind.

 

[smartpatrol]

That makes sense, and it is something HP can't replicate.

Why?

Well I sold over a million dollars of personal PCs at HP's big competitor (Dell) and I know for a fact that pretty much everyone came to me "because they had to." Multiple times a day I would try to convince someone to buy the high-end XPS systems (as they are higher margin) and the response always was "If I had $1000 to spend on a computer I would just buy a Mac!"

Mac has become known as the premium computer line. Like a luxury car it is the type of thing people dream about having one day.

Most computers sold by places like HP and Dell as sub-$600 laptops and desktops with almost no margin. Dell told us they tried real hard to push higher-end systems like the XPS in their marketing, but consumers already associated Dell with being "a cheap computer" which is the exact same market HP is stuck in.

All this is making me wonder how much longer the commodity hardware business will be viable. Think about it:
a) there's much higher profit margins in software & services than in commodity hardware
b) it's basically impossible to sell high-end, premium hardware in a highly competitive market filled with commodity devices
c) the only way to sell high-end hardware (with high profit margins) in any significant volume is if it has unique software and services that you can't get on a competitors device

Is the Apple business model the only viable business model in the long-term?

Sure, right now there is still a healthy market for premium smartphones/tablets. What about a few years from now, where even the cheapest devices have quad-core processors, 2+ GB of RAM, GPU on-par with the Xbox 360, and AMOLED displays? The only way to win in that market is to own the hardware, the OS, AND the ecosystem of services for it. And, it wouldn't hurt to have your own store to sell it in either Is the PC market just a preview for what's to come in the smartphone/tablet market?

I wouldn't be surprised to see MS buy Nokia in the near future. . .