Palm becomes Symbian's newest Licencee? Could It Happen?

And there was me pondering if you'd run this piece over at AAP too so I could see their reactions to it. So have Palm confirmed they are looking at breaking from PalmOS or is that part all still speculation? As I see it the only downside for Palm is that they are known to have amazing backward compatibility with their devices.

No confirmation and no offical word that there will be aTreo with Windows Mobile, but the signs are as strong as a Cat 4 in the Gulf of Mexico

The big question is though; would Palm have more success as a Symbian licensee? What Palm has twigged to to yet is that the main reason people buy Palm handhelds is for the Palm OS. As a Win Mob licensee, they're going to be eaten alive by Dell & HP but if they licensed Symbian, they would have to contend with Nokia and Sony ericsson.

There would be certain irony to it: Samsung as a Palm OS licensee has yet to produced a Palm based handheld in Europe and doesn't have any plans to. Would Palm be any more successful as a Symbian licensee? Doubt it.

However, everyone agrees that unless Palm comes up with something within the next year or so to keep themselves going until PLinux arrives, things are going to get awfully tricky.

It's certainly an interesting one... Palm getting into bed with Microsoft is not something I would have expected. People seem to *like* the Treo 650, which I would not have expected. Access buy up PalmSource - for what exactly, they make web browser products?

I think the key here is UIQ3 - if it is everything to everyone, as it's promised to be, then a Palm / Symbian tie up could make sense. More sense in my mind than a Palm / Microsoft tie up (but hey, the MS thing is virtually confirmed, isn't it).

I somehow can't see Access being interested in producing newer versions of PalmOS - it just doesn't seem to fit in with their business IMO. What I think they were after is some of the rich media handling code which Palm got from BeOS; coupled with the rights and therefore ability to further integrate NetFront into *any* PalmOS distribution.

I suspect UIQ3 might end up providing us with quite a few interesting announcements 😉

Ewan,

I don't think that's going to happen; at least not the the fashion suggested, where Palm has to support 3 major smartphone platforms... Lets look at the reasons you seem to have suggested (all errors and omissions are mine):

1. Palm has already made the decision to go multi-OS in it's product line.
2. Palm is in desperate need of a multi-tasking, multi-threaded operating system that can handle the modern day requirements of a smartphone.
3. Palm can’t wait that long, they need something that works now.
4. Palm owns all the rights to the "Palm" trademark.
5. Palm cannot rely solely on Microsoft, which has been trying to squeeze Palm in the PDA market for years.

I'm not going to suggest that this would be bad for Symbian at all; gaining a new licencee is a no-lose proposition.

However, I take issue with all the reasons; as follows:

In response to 1: While Palm might have decided to go multi-OS, this does not mean that it wants three OS's, and such a multiplicity of OS's will increase support costs massively.

In response to 2-4: I do not dispute that Palm could do it; but what is their incentive when Windows Mobile already provides an answer?

In response to 5: Why? Microsoft is in a position similar to Symbian; particularly since Palm Inc no longer owns the Palm OS. Indeed, Palm as it stands today is most similar to HTC; a simple hardware manufacturer. Any incentive for Microsoft to actively bear ill will towards Palm Inc. vanishes once it becomes a manufacturer of windows mobile devices. Indeed, Microsoft would want Palm to survive and prosper; and Microsoft's goal is windows mobile domination, and the more hardware manufacturers the better. Indeed, even if Microsoft had plans to crush Palm for vindictive reasons, it would not act for some time, and probably not in contravention of it's contracts with Palm. And Microsoft has grown up.

It makes more sense for Palm to concentrate it's engineering resources on a single product - and while Symbian might be a credible alternative; all Palm has to do to maintain it's security against eventual action by Microsoft is to keep a Symbian device in development if possible. (Analagous to how Apple has always had OS X on Intel)

Indeed, the biggest problem for Palm, looking forward, is it's descent into ubiquity, and not in the good sense. If you look at the pictures of the Treo 700w, it seems that the interface is bog-standard, and if Palm becomes just another windows mobile hardware manufacturer, it might just be the end! HP releases devices in the same form factor as the Treo, and with the work HTC is doing, consumers in search of a windows mobile 5.0 device have a plethora of form factors and choices; more than any other smartphone OS at present.

Perhaps Palm is going to release a Symbian device (at least there it has a tactical advantage because there is no Symbian device with that form factor) and the Treo 700w is just a cover, but I cannot imagine that Palm would want to support 3 OS's for no apparent benefit. Two is bad enough.

I think xand makes a good point. I think most of us woulld agree that the idea of Palm licensing Symbian has its merits (for both sides), but given Palm's stated intention to continue using Palm OS and the apparent intention to use WM, adding a third OS does raise questions of cost etc.. On the other hand they evidently been looking at Cobalt (I think some rumours indicate a Cobalt Treo), and Palm Linux they seem happy enough to at least look at other OS's.

An interesting point is that technically make a three way bootable device (at least at the basic hardware level) is not that difficult. The integration is tricky, but that's true of any hardware. I honestly think to crack the European market Symbian is now the only way to go. The US is still Palm and WM led, though that could change.

I'd honestly be a bit surprised if they announced anything soon, but as for the future, it is not yet written. I think its a case of something that can demonstrably be seen as something that makes a lot of sense, but things that make sense don't necessairly happen!

The point about ubiquity is absolutely right. Indeed I actually think companies like Palm have to be weary of Windows Mobile comoditising mobiles as Windows did on the PC. Its very dangerous for them (i.e. they dont want to turn into thin margin Dells).

Well I will just restate wht I said in another thread. Palms CEO has been very careful to say precisely nothing about future OS's. He's not included or excluded any OS and that includes Symbian.

Is the Windows Mobiles stuff just hype created by US tech reporting? Possibly, possibly not but one thing is sure there is no way the US press would ever consider Palm using Symbian because Symbian does not exist in their eyes. They just assume if Palm is to use another OS then it must be Windows Mobile.

However as Palm were keen to buy Palm source that shows some dedication to the Palm OS so prehaps there are no major changes from Palm in the offing.

Anyway its interesting to see what happens and now I've said this the Windows based Treo will probably be announced tomorrow 😉

With the comment I made elsewhere about Palm running Windows Mobile will essentially be the same as Apple running Windows XP, they'll lose their identity and be fighting against a plethora of other "identical" products.

Either way Palm can't use Windows Mobile, we know what Microsoft licensing is like (if you want to ship with our OS pre-installed then you can't ship with any other OSs), Palm would soon find themselves with pressure to stop using PalmOS and despite the fact that it makes no difference to Joe Bloggs, the amount of Palm fanboys who support in much the same way the Mac boys do Apple will suddenly find that they are set adrift with a sudden loss of their backward compatability and this new and evil interface. It'd be more harm than good.

SwitchBlade wrote: we know what Microsoft licensing is like (if you want to ship with our OS pre-installed then you can't ship with any other OSs)

We don't "know" this. Even if this is true for microsoft windows XP, it may still be untrue for windows mobile.

Ewan wrote:pluck the previously unthinkable out of the ether.

In truth, this is hardly something deserving to be declared as 'previously unthinkable'. On the contrary, the Palm UI on Symbian OS has been thought of many times before, by Nokia, by Psion, and by Palm.

A Palm-Psion alliance was in the cards for a long time, only thwarted by a Palm's short-sighted, 'not-invented-here'-attitude, 'i-did-it-my-way'-minded chief technology officer at the time.

A few years later, Nokia was toying with the idea of having a Palm-styled UI running on Symbian and even made some press announcements in this direction.

I just read over on PalmInfoCenter that a reporter at the launch queried whether we would see Linux or Symbian Treos and the answer was a categoric "No". Shame really - UIQ on a Treo is a really appealing idea...

And up until March 2004, Ed Colligan probably said a categoric No to Microsoft, then started to hedge until this press conference. But the Microsoft project has been going "for years..."

No more comment.