Apple to Buy out Palm?

JFlex writes "According to a story over at Personal Computer World 'Speculation that Apple plans to buy handheld maker Palm has been revived by a call from two leading Palm investors for the company to be put up for sale, according to the local paper of both companies.'"

In other news...

...the Infinium Phantom will be released next month!

(Seriously...this "Apple to buy Palm" rumor has been going on forever...)

Re:In other news...

But then again, so has the "Apple to switch to Intel" rumor.

Newton-Palm Hybrid

If Apple could make a Newton / Palm hybrid, it'd be the ultimate PDA.

Re:Newton-Palm Hybrid

I think there's some truth to the parent post. A single PDA that merged the best features of both the Newton and the Palm could be really slick. While I'll assume that most people reading this are pretty familiar with the Palm and what it has to offer, I recognize that the Newton may be a bit more of a mystery. I blogged a bit about what the Newton has to offer in 2006 [blogspot.com] elsewhere and won't repeat it all here.

The Newton has actually been mentioned on various news sites [osnews.com] a lot lately, due largely in part to the recent Worldwide Newton Conference [newtontalk.net] but also because of recent advances like the Einstein project [kallisys.com] and the Newton book reader for Firefox [newtonslibrary.org].

I'm personally hoping that maybe some of its innovative user interface ideas get carried over into other projects. Obviously Apple's current Ink tablet handwriting recognition system is a direct port from the Newton. Less obviously perhaps is that its Dock removal animation is, too.

Re:Newton-Palm Hybrid

I'm personally hoping that maybe some of its innovative user interface ideas get carried over into other projects. Obviously Apple's current Ink tablet handwriting recognition system is a direct port from the Newton. Less obviously perhaps is that its Dock removal animation is, too.

I've made this comment before (to jcr in fact). If Ink is a direct port from the Newton, they broke it along the way. I have bugs filed (if you could search them) the describe this. I'll give you the short version first: Pull out your tablet on your Mac, write the word 'Rosetta' in cursive (and as typical for most writers, cross both Ts at once). On a Newton MP 2100 it will correctly translate this to 'Rosetta' 100% of the time for me. With Ink it gets translated to 'RoseHa' 100% of the time. Somewhere between Newton's 'Rosetta' handwriting recognition and OS X's 'Ink' recognition, they forgot how to 1) understand cursive, 2) learn user handwriting, 3) allow training of the recognizer, 4) allow the insertion caret to be used for punctuation, 5) correctly understand editing gestures in (almost) all cases -- ever try to join a broken word with Ink?.

For completeness sake, let me include that old bug report (which includes a snippet from a thread jcr and I had going about Ink's flaws compared to the Newton): https://bugreport.apple.com/ [apple.com] Problem ID: 3828160 (this bug is still marked "Open")

06-Oct-2004 02:53 AM David Rolfe:
Steps to reproduce:

Write the word "Rosetta" crossing both Ts at once.

Expecteed Results:

As opposed to the expected "Rosetta" appearing in the Ink Window (or current text field, instead a result similar to "RoseHa" will appear.

Workaround:

Write slowly, and unnaturally. Avoid mixed-printing. Never use cursive.

For more information, I provide this summary from a conversation with an non-Apple (third party) OS X developer. I outline other bugs and missing features below. Especially, THE LACK OF A PUNCTUATION POP-UP ATTACHED TO THE INSERTION CARET IN THE INK WINDOW. Would it be appropriate to file that as another bug/feature?

----
I certainly have not spent as much time training Ink [compared to the time spent using the Newton MP2100, which I use as a baseline for comparison]. For one, it doesn't have the quick interface to teach a misrecognized word (you know: double tap, select correct guess) even in the 'Ink Window' where they try to emulate the Newton environment. Second, clicking on the caret in the Ink Window doesn't give a punctuation pop-up like the Newton, which makes punctuating things written in Ink a CHORE; good thing Apple doesn't make computers without keyboards these days... Otherwise your punctuation would he half-assed as it tries to guess whether something is a period or an accidental tap. Finally, Ink in 10.3 doesn't supply some training app like the Newton's prefs, the closest option is specifically adding words to a list that it frequently gets wrong, or that it can't dictionary guess. This list doesn't even learn (i.e. it doesn't automatically populate with a list of words that the recognizer knows it had a low confidence score on).

I know Ink is an afterthought -- Apple can't seriously consider Ink to be a 'solution' as it stands today. I'll give it two things though - the scribble sound it plays while you write sure is cute and it's fun to be able to include doodles right into iChat. However, you could not use an iBook, feasibly, without a keyboard, and get the same range of functionality as a heavy, 10 year old MP 2100.

I know again I'm coming off like some kind of freak -- but really, the Newton could tell when you crossed two Ts at once, and that chokes Ink in OS X -- so whatever changes they made since its [Rosetta's?] implementation on the ARM and the PPC they broke it.

I mean seriously JCR -- do you have both [an MP and a tablet equipped Mac]? Can you

Re:Newton-Palm Hybrid

Frankly, I don't know what the hype about iPod-phones is...the ability to play MP3s from your phone has been around for several years. My Cingular 2125 (HTC Tornado, rebranded), much like other smartphones/PDA phones, has a MiniSD slot and I can watch videos and listen to music with it.

The hype about "iPod phones" is that they'd have a MP3-playing phone that's the ease-of-use equivalent of the iPod.

The iPod, just as a hardware device, is admittedly slick, but it's not that wonderful. It's a hard drive, a funny-shaped battery, a microprocessor, and some controls in a white Lexan box. What gives it most of its value is the integration with iTunes and the automatic syncronization/updating. It's totally brainless -- you never have to worry about what music is on your portable versus what is on your computer (assuming you have one of the larger iPods). When the iPod first came out, this was the selling feature for it, compared to other, smaller-capacity players. You plugged it in, it did its thing, and you could grab the player and go.

I don't know of a cellphone that offers that. You have to add or copy the songs manually, and that's a drag; geeks might be okay with it, but a whole lot of mainstream consumers won't, especially if they use iTunes as their jukebox/music-manager already. People have come to expect total integration from a music player, and anything that offers less just isn't going to fly.

I owned a pre-iPod, flash-based music player. It was called the Pontis, and it was pretty forward-thinking when it was released. It used MMC cards, so the capacity was virtually unlimted, it had great battery life, and it was rugged as hell. But it sucked. It sucked because any time you wanted to add more music to it, you had to fire up a separate program and move the files to it. Later I think they achieved some jukebox integration, but it was with programs that were clunky (Musicmatch) and generally less elegant than iTunes. This is about where cellphones are now; nobody has figured out how to really integrate a cellular phone with the computer, in the same way that Apple integrated the MP3 player.

IMO, it's relentlessly stupid to involve a cable in this integration. A cellphone's integration should be even more transparent than the iPod's, because it ought to do it all wirelessly. Make a playlist in iTunes, and the next time you bring your phone within Bluetooth range of the computer, it gets updated (along with your Address Book, Calendar, etc.). When you have that kind of seamlessness, you will have an iPod equivalent. Otherwise, all you have is a Pontis equivalent.

Perfect? Like Neck stretched over chopping block?

Palm is in the perfect position to build the device.

There really isn't anything obvious that Palm can offer to such an effort that Apple doen't already have a demonstrated ability to do without Palm.

In fact, stretched out over the chopping block, Palm really isn't in the perfect postion to do much of anything. Consider what has been thought to be their core asset for many years -- PalmOS, a system designed from the ground up to run on light weight mobile devices. The software quality is crap, and had been for years. Phone vendors are giving up on PalmOS. Palm is giving up on PalmOS. What do they have left? A few patents, a few hardware and software engineers and Grafiti. Well, honestly, I preferred the handwriting recognition in Newton (presently in suspended animation known as InkWell). The quality of other Palm software (which runs on the PC systems they connect with) is even worse, and demonstrates a deep lack of concern for the user experience of their customers. This leads me to suspect that if you scratch the surface, Palm is really not very much Apple-like in corporate culture in many ways.

No offense intended to those of you who might still work there, but the quality of PalmOS doesn't exactly scream, "Hey, buy the company because you'll get a great engineering team!"

The point is: There are undoubtedly a few good engineers left at Palm, but Apple can simply hire the good ones. They don't need to buy the company and get layers of clearly innefective mangement, legions of pissed off customers, and legacy technology baggage like PalmOS and HotSync as part of the deal.

Scratched surfaces

This leads me to suspect that if you scratch the surface...

Was this a subtle dig at the iPod Nano's screen? Do I really want to run a stylus across a screen made by Apple? *ducks*

-Peter

Translation: We want to make money with hype

According to a story over at Personal Computer World [two leading Palm investors have created the]Speculation that Apple plans to buy handheld maker Palm [in order to drive up the stock price before they dump it and make loads of $$$.]

If this happens

Too bad the article isn't working for me.

Considering the previous technology leading position of the Newton MessagePad back in the late 1990s, and the fact that Steve Jobs killed it (calling it a "damn scribble pad"), coupled with changing demographics due dramatic shifts in the paradigm of handheld computing, if this actually happens I believe I speak for all former Newton owners, when I say WTF??

Good idea

Apple could jump back into the market with the Blackberry struggling/in limbo, and offer the sort of solution they're famous for - one which somehow integrates all parts of the product's chain. They could stick Safari on it, and have it synchonize histories and emails with the home iMac/mini, as well as having some sort of iDisk related fun (which will have to drop in price).

Palm has access to interesting IP on their hands

These come to mind:

* BeOS/BeIA code: no idea how relevant it is today, but could still prove worthwhile.

* Palm-sized device expertise: maybe some of the knowledge and technologies palm has could go to make an even-better iPod. (can't wait to see that).

* Application Base: maybe we're going to see an app translator?

* Synchronization software: maybe newer iPods will need to sync apps and documents too. might want to have access to well-established code for that.

Buying palm, or buying BeOS?

I must admit to not being completely up to date with the whole BeOS saga. But afaik the last company to own BeOS was Palm. And yes, I know about yellowTAB's ZETA, but they never claimed to actually own any of the BeOS code.

So it might just be it's not palm, but BeOS they are after. Which might fit into the whole Apple X86 thing.

I don't see much value

I'm rather suspicious of this story, in part because I don't see Palm adding much value to Apple. When the Palm Pilot was popular, the fact that so much could be fit in such a small device was nothing short of amazing. It was also a useful little tool for all kinds of data organization. But now? Palm's OS is older than the hills, designed for hardware limits that no longer matter. Palm has been using bits of trickery to extend the limits of their OS, but at the end of the day they just need something new that takes advantage of modern, low-power hardware.

Another problem is that Palm has been about as phlegmatic as you can get when it comes to promoting their market. If they were like Apple, they could have sewn up the electronic book market years ago. Instead, they seem content to allow the rest of the market to make half-hearted attempts at producing solutions. That just isn't going to work. If Palm wants to grab the e-reader market (a market for which they are extremely well suited), they need to follow Apple's lead and grab the bull by the horns. Since they show no signs of doing this, I see nothing but signs of decline for Palm.

If Apple wants to enter the handheld market (again), I see them developing a new device with a high-resolution, high-pixel density screen. They would then try to add the ability to show documents are precisely as possible, utilizing scaling algorithms. (Many books and documents suffer if their layout is changed a la Acrobat Pocket.) These features could be easily built into a new device OS by Apple engineers rather than trying to overhaul the aging Palm OS.

They would then market it with a new "catchy" Apple brand like "iHand" or "iBooklet", and either integrate it into a new eBook/Portable App section of iTunes, or develop a new iTunes-like app.

So given this scenario, where does the Palm value come in? The name? Nope. Apple would want consistent branding. The OS? No way. Palm is so full of cruft I swear that the developers are ready to shoot it. The device designs? Never. They're way too far behind the curve.

So I think I'm going to go with "rumor" on this one.

And PALM stock if off a little this morning

So, the market doesn't believe the rumor either

Not good new for Palm

Other than a full license to Graffiti, there is little for Palm to offer. Don't get me wrong, I own a Palm Pilot and am probably one of the few left who love it.

However, I can easily see Apple producing a product of superior technology with as good an interface, based on the iPod. In fact, my iPod supports full motion video, gigs of data, and a simple interface. Start adding features and you face the Palm conundrum: How do you change the interface to a vastly successful product, and keep your customer base?

Part of Palm's other dilemma was its success. I have had the same Palm Pilot since it came out five years ago. It does everything I need, it syncs to my desktop, keeps outlook happy (oops that may be an Apple issue), and allows me to handle the things I want to. It will be interesting to see if iPod suffers the same issues.

If you want to make me a happy camper - make an iPod version with a nice 4" screen, support for palm like applications (notebook, address book, calendar, etc.) and support Ebook formats. Then provide a truly open development environment. One of the great things about palm was how many 3rd part applications were available because Palm wined and dined independent developers. But that means you (the platform owner) do not control everything on your platform.

Such a tool would allow me to hold my videos, books, and all the last things my palm does today. But none of these require palm to provide.

But wait -- what about the phone? Forget it. While some people do use the phone to replace the palm, most never do much but store phone numbers. Further, people are used to a phone being replaced every two years - for free. That is a market that pays for itself in the marketing of minutes. Not a good place to play.

Does this mean that BEOS is coming back? :)

Wow! Great news.
Maybe they will dump OSX and make a 64 bit version of BEOS!!!!
YAY!!!!
We all knew Jobs couldn't keep his hands off BEOS. ;)

(I'm being levitous)

This is just one of those rumors..

It's comes up from time to time, "Apple is going to buy Palm!" "Apple is creating a version of their OS to work with Intel chips!" .. . . err.... uh.... hmmm.

Re:The iPalm?

I don't know... If people start downloading pron from iTunes straight to the iPalm things could get iHairy.

-Rick

Re:The iPalm?

I've always thought they'd name their next PDA the "iSaac"

Re:Good for Apply Maybe, good for Palm - NO!

Palm is already working a new version of Palm OS with Linux as the kernel, effectively creating their own "OS X" story. Whether they'll be as successful as OS X is remains to be seen.

Re:Good for Apply Maybe, good for Palm - NO!

Palm Source is working on Palm OS.

Palm Source isn't owned by Palm. It's owned by a Japanese company whose name I can't remember.

Palm don't own their own OS these days.

Re:Good for Apply Maybe, good for Palm - NO!

As for rewriting in Linux - does that mean their current Palm OS is such a dead end that they can't evolve it?

Yes. I've developed for it before, and it's got cruft coming out of its ears. It was designed around the idea that a device would never have more than 8 Megs of RAM, and that the controls/screen would be fixed in their design. In addition, memory is partitioned into small "databases" with explicit record sizes. These databases are the only thing keeping the data separate. If something goes wrong, one database can easily overwrite another. No MMU exists to prevent this.

Other issues include:

• Applications are identified by 4 byte codes.
• Databases are associated on those same 4 byte codes.
• Libraries are non-existant, and have to be hacked into the OS.
• Large memory areas are handled by bank-switching, putting limits on where executable code can run.
• Large programs or data sets cannot be loaded into memory because of the bank-switching. They usually need to be constantly swapped out.
• The graphics facilities are primitive, representing the hi-end of portable technology in the mid 90's.
• Lack of libraries and program designs tend to result in large amounts of duplicated code.
• Poor acclimation to network facilities, due to its original design as a "satellite" device rather than a wireless portable.

There's more, but those are just off the top of my head.

It's hideously expensive to rewrite software from scratch and a lot of companies will fail in the process.

My best suggestion would be an emulator. Given that a new OS would be able to take advantage of the greater speeds of modern ARM processors, most software could be run under a port of the current desktop emulator that developers use today. Performance critical software would do best to port, but new versions have always been an issue for them anyway.

Idiotic

AAPL is down 20 percent and looks like it is on its way to the mid-50s support level.

You obviously got modded "insightful" by an Apple-basher. Yes, Apple is down 20% from its peak, but it's still up 600% in the last two years, up 80% in the last year, up 50% in the last six months, and up 10% in the last three months. That performance whoops ass on just about any other investment out there.

Re:BeOS

So does this mean that the BeOS will be under the ownership of Apple as well?

Mod down. BeOS was formerly purchased by PalmSource (not Palm) which was recently purchased by Access of Japan.