

Amazon in talks with HP to buy Palm - mjfern
http://venturebeat.com/2011/09/29/amazon-buy-palm/

======
j_col
As a long-suffering webOS fan (Pre- through to Pre3 & Touchpad), all I have to
say to this news is, yay! WebOS is a fantastic system that does not deserve to
linger and die due to HP's lack of leadership and vision.

Jeff Bezzos, on the other hand, is a true visionary in my opinion and I would
be happy to see my webOS HP Profile become an Amazon profile sometime soon.

My only doubt though: will they make phones?

~~~
zitterbewegung
I don't think they will make phones or even continue webOS. I have a feeling
that this is a talent acquisition and they will use it to improve the Kindle
Fire.

~~~
technoslut
They will undoubtedly make phones. Why give away a market to competitors that
is worth billions? Amazon wants to keep users in their ecosystem. To do that
you need a phone as well, which they're essentially already doing in their
AppStore.

Within three years Amazon will come out with their own phone. It will be the
same game plan that they used with the Fire and gear it towards the low end.
Eventually they will go towards the high end.

~~~
w33ble
The Fire makes sense, it's a media portal that plugs directly in to Amazon's
forte; books, and more recently, apps and streaming video. It's not a tablet
though, and Bezos readily, and correctly, admits that. What exactly would they
gain by making a phone? Sure they would stand to sell more apps, but I think
Amazon is most interesting in selling books and being a player in the
streaming media game. The cell phone, with its small screen, isn't well-suited
for those. Not to mention that their apps are Android apps, something I
wouldn't think Palm would make a great resource for. If they are buying Palm
for hardware and cell phone experience, I'd think there would be a cheaper way
to get those somewhere else.

Phones don't make sense in Amazon's model at all to me. Of course, I could be
wrong, but unless it's driving sales of Amazon products, like the Kindle does,
there's no incentive.

~~~
rudiger
How is the Kindle Fire not a tablet?

~~~
w33ble
It kind of is as a secondary function, but it was built as a media
consumption/purchasing device, a kind of hand-held portal into the world of
Amazon; even their browser relies heavily on their EC2 platform. Compared to
the Android tablets on the market, it lacks a lot in the way of expandability
and even storage. Even the underlying Android OS was forked to bring it
further away from a tablet and more to an Amazon portal. That it runs Android
Apps is just a pleasant side effect.

To quote Bezos himself, "We think of Kindle Fire as an end-to-end service"

[http://techcrunch.com/2011/09/29/bezos-in-the-modern-era-
of-...](http://techcrunch.com/2011/09/29/bezos-in-the-modern-era-of-consumer-
electronics-devices-if-you-are-just-building-a-device-you-are-unlikely-to-
succeed/)

~~~
jonursenbach
Aren't all tablets media consumption and purchasing devices though?

~~~
w33ble
Sure, but none of the Android tablets are really purpose built for that.
Samsung, Motorola, Asus and all the others seem to aim to be a kind of more-
portable laptop, giving you memory card slots, cameras and to some extent even
office type applications. These are the kinds of things that people market as
a "tablet" and media consumption is something of an afterthought. The Kindle
Fire is the other way around; media consumption is forefront, everything else,
including apps to an extent, are an afterthought. This is more along Apple's
vision with their iPad, and it's working out pretty well for them too.

At the end of the day, maybe I'm just arguing semantics, but the fact remains
that this isn't a "tablet" in the same light as other Android "tablets." It's
a bit of a subtle difference, and I think it's that difference that is crucial
and will spell massive success for the Fire. Their ability to sell it at what
I assume is a sizable loss isn't hurting their chances either.

------
modeless
What would Amazon do with WebOS when they have already invested so much in
Android? Switching would require them to abandon the app store they built. The
Silk browser seems at odds with how WebOS works. All their Android UI
customizations would have to be rewritten.

~~~
j_col
Look at it this way: their are about 1 million Touchpad users already out
their due to the HP firesale. That's a nice market to buy, considering these
people will want to upgrade to something in 12-18 months time, while keeping
their profiles and all of the webOS software they bought (the app market in
webOS land is thriving by the way since the massive influx of new users). I
think whatever software work they would have to do to make this happen would
be worth it to them.

Also remember they would be free of Google and Android, and all of the legal
battles happening in that space right now. webOS is so far removed from any of
the other platforms out there that there is no danger of being sued by someone
for copying them.

~~~
modeless
Amazon has probably 10 times that many Kindle users or more already, and if HP
sells Palm at a 90% discount that's still $120 per TouchPad user who may or
may not ever upgrade to an Amazon Kindle. That would be a stupid way to
acquire users.

Also, if you think WebOS is somehow immune to the plague of lawsuits in this
industry you're crazy. Nobody is safe from lawsuits. It's just a cost of doing
business these days; you pay your success tax and you move on.

~~~
j_col
> Amazon has probably 10 times that many Kindle users or more already

Kindle users may very well prove to be a different demographic than tablet
users. If they sell 10 million Fires then they will probably be out-selling
iPads in that space, can't see that happening. A lot of Kindle users will
stick to Kindle because they just want to read books on an e-ink screen.

> Also, if you think WebOS is somehow immune to the plague of lawsuits in this
> industry you're crazy. Nobody is safe from lawsuits.

Do you have any idea how many mobile patents Palm has?

~~~
modeless
Now patents might be a good reason to buy Palm, but that's completely separate
from the fate of WebOS. Amazon could take the patents and throw WebOS away.

~~~
vanadium
I could see Amazon using the card metaphor as a custom multitasking Android
launcher with full power of a pending patent application behind it while
ditching the remainder of the OS. It's the one distinction webOS has had in UX
and one that's generally garnered the most positive attention.

I could not, however, see Amazon hedging on Android by holding webOS in state.
That would be a rather insane move given the audience the Kindle Fire will
attract from Day One.

~~~
j_col
What about Dalvik and the on-going Oracle case? webOS has no Java, there is
another distinction for you. It's the full stack in webOS that is unique, not
just the UI.

~~~
vanadium
That's partially true; webOS 3.0 has no Java as far as I'm aware, deferring to
node.js for its services instead. webOS prior to that (e.g., Mojo era)
contains an absolute trove of Java all over the damned place. I remember
dissecting the media system looking for private APIs in parallel with
developing a webOS application and many points led right back to Java-based
services that assisted in doing a lot of perfunctory tasks.

In fact, I distinctly remember asking the Palm webOS developers when I
discovered in their Java-based media services a particular call that instantly
parsed SHOUTcast/Icecast-style playlists of many various formats with ease
whether it'd become a public API call. It never did.

If HP races to finally reconcile the two sides as a promised a half-year ago a
la Android's ICS, then there might be no obstacles to the Java argument. Until
then, however...

------
rkalla
We saw the launch of the Kindle Fire and have seen Amazon's hand with the
custom build of Android that looks/feels nothing like Android... anyone have
any guesses why they would want WebOS?

Amazon already has the Android store, all the Android integration done for the
Fire and the Java/Android expertise in house... where does WebOS fit in?

~~~
sksultan
a) HP's probably offering it for pennies. Too good of a deal for any
tablet/mobile player.

b) Amazon Silk is a game changer that probably has Google fuming. Buying Palm
is probably a hedge bet in case Google clamps down. The end-user
platform(devise, OS, browser) war between Google, Apple, and MS is to control
the user data. Amazon wants to make sure it has an unrestricted piece of that
data.

~~~
mappu
I don't know if Silk has Google "fuming"..

Opera Mini has been doing the remote-rendering thing for years and years now.
It is _the most_ widely used mobile browser, with 113+ million users and 2+
billion _daily_ pageviews.

~~~
alttag

      > [Opera] is the most widely used mobile browser
    

Use appears to be mostly from Asia. In Europe, iPhone leads by a wide margin,
followed by Android; in North America, Android leads, followed by iPhone [2].
Opera makes at best a fourth place showing on these continents.

To your point about "fuming", I think you're right. There's no evidence that
Google's analytics or search (advertising) products will be negatively
impacted by silk.

1: [http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_browser-eu-
monthly-201009-...](http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_browser-eu-
monthly-201009-201108) 2: [http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_browser-na-
monthly-201009-...](http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_browser-na-
monthly-201009-201108)

~~~
nazar
I can narrow down Asia to Post Soviet asian countries such as Uzbekistan,
Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan etc. Internet is normally overpriced in these
countries and opera mini has nice compression features and dedicated "turn off
images" button, which is very handy. And not everyone here can afford high end
iOS/android devices, so for Symbian, Opera mini is the best choice.

------
michaelpinto
I first misread that as "Amazon in talks to buy HP" and what's funny is that
it didn't shock me. On the other hand if they only got Palm that would be
great for IP.

------
iand
The only way I can see this making sense is if Amazon could buy the supply
chain relationships that HP must have built for their tablets. Probably HP
have options/exclusivity deals on display and chip production for the coming
years.

~~~
suivix
Off-topic, but is there a reason you say 'HP have' instead of 'HP has'? I was
talking to a few British guys at work about this and they thought it sounded
odd as well.

~~~
alexholehouse
If we're referring to HP as a single company it should be has ( - it has ...)

If we're referring to HP as a collective of things (i.e. individuals, such as
the board) then it should be have ( - they have ....)

IMO I'd say it could be either really, though I would probably favour the
singular.

~~~
wycats
This is one of those US/UK differences. In the US, we usually refer to
companies or groups (like sports teams) as singular. In the UK, companies have
been historically referred to as plural. Since the parent uses the British
spelling 'favour', but feels the singular form is correct, I wonder if that's
changing.

------
fpgeek
To me the detail that doesn't ring true is that HP would sell Palm at a
substantial loss. Last I heard, people thought HP could at least recoup the
purchase price (or more) based on the "value" of Palm's patents alone. I
suppose HP could be selling Palm with only patent licenses (instead of the
patents themselves), but that seems like a strange thing to do on both sides.

If HP were being clever, I could see them leaking their discussions with
Amazon right now (when Amazon is on everyone's mind) as a way to motivate the
"real" buyer (presumably Google or Apple). But I don't give HP credit for
being that clever.

------
r00fus
The patents alone would be worth it to Amazon... who likely have no really
interesting mobile hardware or software patents of their own.

Interesting note about Ruby's being on the Amazon board too, didn't notice
that earlier.

------
alexknight
Even if this is true and it does happen, I would think Palm as a brand is
dead. Even if the Fire 2 ends up having webOS, Amazon would never market it
that way. Just as how Android is behind the scenes on the current Fire, they
would do the same with webOS.

------
MichaelApproved
With Fire, Amazon essentially has an independent OS. The only reason to by
Palm would be that Google will not protect you as an Android maker and you
need your own patent portfolio to defend yourself.

~~~
nodata
Didn't Amazon work with Google to create the Fire?

~~~
octover
No, they didn't. The biggest sign you can see out in the open is that the Fire
is running a fork of 2.3 Gingerbread instead of 3.0 Honeycomb or the upcoming
Ice Cream Sandwich.

~~~
nodata
Oh yes, from looking at them essentially forking it, it looks like they didn't
work together.

But my question was whether or not they _did_ work together, one of the tech
sites wrote that they did. I will try and find the reference.

~~~
RexRollman
I seem to remember that as well but I have no reference for it.

------
iradik
This sounds like a large talent acquisition.

------
frankiewarren
Could this have anything to do with the licensing fees that are becoming a
reality with the Android ecosystem? It might be an incentive to bring things
in house in the future (both hardware and software).

------
markokocic
I would like that to happen. I was never a fan of Palm products, but WebOS
seems like a nice alternative OS for mobiles and tablets.

I'm sure Amazon would know how to handle it better than HP.

------
daeken
Please do, then sell Be off to someone that will do something with it. Please?

~~~
kylec
Be went with PalmSource back when Palm was split into PalmOne and PalmSource.
PalmOne then re-became Palm and was acquired by HP, but PalmSource was picked
up by ACCESS.

~~~
daeken
Wow, I had no idea how that all went down. Thanks for the info.

------
Apocryphon
I hope that whomever HP sells Palm off to will bring back the brand.

~~~
elithrar
> I hope that whomever HP sells Palm off to will bring back the brand.

I think the Palm brand is "too far gone" in the public mindset to be worth
bringing back. The Amazon brand is a far stronger, far more popular brand and
its important that they don't dilute that right as they launch the Fire.

Acquiring Palm, to me, would be so they can acquire patents, some developers
and designers, and some tech. WebOS, nice as it is, has missed the train.
Amazon would be insane to backflip now (even I wish they'd used WebOS to begin
with).

------
Zakuzaa
Probably for talent and patents acquisition.

------
spinchange
It's the patents.

------
DotNetPete1
great news

