HP is spinning off the WebOS division into a new company named Gram
0. phoneArena 15 Aug 2012, 10:32 posted on
HP is going to divest webOS altogether, spinning the division off into a new company focused on "unleashing the power of the web"...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
6. pokharkarsaga (Posts: 382; Member since: 23 Feb 2012)
two expectations from Web OS:-
>More Enterprise features
>Super fast OS as compared to other operating systems.
Can Web OS be programmed entirely in Assembly language?
as Assembly language is super quick and requires very low memory.I think this will be a good option for smartphones.
12. The_Godfather (Posts: 186; Member since: 26 Apr 2012)
Imagine a Samsung phone with Web OS....Will kill other smartphones which are out there....!!
2. snowgator (Posts: 3556; Member since: 19 Jan 2011)
Didn't think HP really was interested in developing an open source OS. I know they need to find a way to recoup their investment, maybe financing a "start-up" and getting some investors along the way is a better long term answer.
All I know is I truly miss my WebOS. No matter what comes out of this, there isn't much chance it will be what the small but happy community remembers it being.
What a waste.
3. CharlieAtInfinity (Posts: 253; Member since: 10 Apr 2012)
Well, I wish them all the best and a bright future ahead! :)
4. tedkord (Posts: 10292; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
Hopefully this will lead to WebOS becoming a viable alternative to Android.
9. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
Doubtful. webOS' time has gone, the victim of insufficient resources and no commitment by HP. WP has the best chance of becoming the 3rd option in the mobile OS space. MS has the motivation to make it work (unlike HP).
13. pikapowerize (banned) (Posts: 1869; Member since: 03 May 2012)
there's always room for more competition... android dominant reason is because its so free, china phones even have them installed...
WP cant get its name on the top coz it lack support on manufacturers.. samsung and htc for instant, htc was one of the first manufacturers of WinMo but they change to android.. samsung is concentrating to android.. they dont even give something to its own bada OS.. and ithat tizen is no where to be found now... so thanks to nokia, WP might be the alternative... but take note, most of the android users are ex nokia lovers... they cant shift to WP coz they are not familiar with it so their choice is go android coz it looks like symbian...
dont forget, there's BlackBerry 10 too.. but im doubtful that it will boom..it is really promising, and it could really bring RIM to top again but its up to marketing.. if they market it wrong they will fail.. if they market it on the price of an iPhone or android royalties they are doomed!! but if they market it to general market like nokia and microsoft did to lumia 900, it will really get some traction again... lumia 900 get some traction because of that marketing... and they even lower the price because it wont be udpated to WP8.. so RIM needs to do the same.. they need to offer the BB7 devices cheaper...and the PlayBook too!!they shouldn't price is similar to the iPad (the 4G variant)
there is also the upcoming Jolla OS, this is the REAL LINUX... this is made by ex nokia because nokia didn't believe in meego!! but a lot of people believe on it!! it is base on meego and linux and core of mer and qt! they are greatful that nokia sold qt coz qt can live!
the only bad thing that nokia did is abandoning all they got.. symbian, maemo/meego to WP.. if WP fail s40 cant save them.. for example the asha 305/311 they look premium but they are fooling people!!!its not a smartphone.. even people on that market wants to multitask coz its a need now... and they are even a bit higher than low end android.. so people will still choose android than s40 touch! but if they choose symbian to these market, i think there low end is save! symbian has a decent interface, enough apps and can run in ancient tech! and it can multitask!!
there's also the new firefox OS but i think its not ready for primetime coz its a web OS.. its code and apps are all on the web... so i think it wont run apps that is offline.. im not betting on this one..
so i think webOS has potential to be back!!! but they really need to change the name of the OS!! i think HP make a good move to this... because microsoft dont want its code to be with webOS thats why it was halted! so making a new company is a good decision!! so that windows cont will be untouch by webOS!!!
im betting that android will still dominate at 25%, iOS at 15%, WP at 15% too, BB10 at 15% too, jolla at 10% and webOS (they really need to change the name!!! ) at 10% but i want them to be the android alternative.. hist saw the touchpad, and fall inlove with it
5. Aeires (unregistered)
Their new phone should be called "Phoenix." Be great if WebOS comes back strong.
14. pikapowerize (banned) (Posts: 1869; Member since: 03 May 2012)
but they seriously need to change the OS and have a logo to be eye catchy!!!
7. threed61 (Posts: 192; Member since: 27 May 2011)
Even if they could find a way to make GOOD hardware, webOS goes nowhere until they can fix the awful lag. And catch up from 2 years behind.
8. JeffreyMDoran (Posts: 9; Member since: 25 Jun 2012)
Another company working on this is Phoenix International Communication -http://phxdevices.com/
10. KEVlN (Posts: 83; Member since: 19 Aug 2011)
I wish they would consider infusing their webOS software with android. It could make for a beautiful team. If you really think about it, they aren't much different when it comes to UI. Basic launcher, home screen, and search functionality are pretty comparable. I'm not really into android skins but I wouldnt mind an official webOS android skin.
11. Jyakotu (Posts: 844; Member since: 12 Dec 2008)
webOS had so much going for it, but Palm really dropped the ball on the hardware. They just needed to make new form factors, like all touch screen, for example. *sighs* It's ashamed that such a great mobile OS is no more because it was attractive, fluid, and functional.