http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/...-heres-why.ars

from the article:
I messed around with a co-worker's Pre a few weeks ago. There was nothing all that interesting about the UI, other than I couldn't figure out how to close a program or switch back to the desktop (turns out there's a bunch of extra touch area below the screen with no indication that it exists).

But the quote above really is what sums up the author's opinion. Clearly the press has voted that vendor lock in is the superior business model. Even Nokia is trying to lock users in with the Ovi universe over on the Symbian side. So why aren't we all locked in on our PCs? Ignoring Outlook at work for a minute, over the past few years most of the computing experience for people is web surfing or online gaming. Online games are like pop records in that when the game is completed you loose interest, and begin looking for the next big game. But web experience is proving to be a little more long-lived, and incredibly sticky - Facebook being the obvious example.

Getting back to Outlook, why that instead of, well, anything else? Because for the most part, we have to use it. When I was installing cable modems in people's homes, I could tell right away if someone worked for a big company or small one just by what email client they wanted. If they didn't care, they either didn't do office work or worked in a small operation like a real estate office. The people who worked for a company of any size HAD to have me set up Outlook to work with our POP servers because for them, that's what email is. It didn't matter that Outlook Express, a web client or Thunderbird would better serve their needs, it was Outlook or nothing.

When people ask me about my N900, I show them some of what I think makes it interesting, like the web browser and Skype integration. I skip the terminal but I do mention that I can grab files off my NAS from anywhere and I can log into it and make it ring if I don't know where I left it. iPhoners don't get it, in fact they really can't get past the resistive touch, or they point out that iPhone can be jailbroken, like that jailbreaking is endorsed by Apple. I usually counter by taking the back off to show them the battery and SD card. But there's really nothing but the "openness" of the N900/Maemo platform that is compelling.

Of course, for those of us who "get it," that's plenty.

I would love Palm's Synergy on my N900. That looks like the best feature that the Palm had.

One of the major features of the n900 and maemo that swayed my decision to eventually buy it was the n900 device is the closest thing to the "linux experience".

It's open source, flexible and relatively easy to port applications to it.

The Palm Pre just did not seem that interesting when it was launched. I don't remember that "killer" feature or app that compelled me to think "wow this is an interesting phone".

When android phones started appearing in the market, one of it's killer features was the phone was tied into Google services. Again the open-source nature of the platfrom means anyone can get involved.

I nearly bought an android phone until I heard about the n900 and I'm glad I waited.

We then have the iphone.
I am going to commit a cardinal sin here and say I like the device. However, I do not like the company policy of locking everything down. This is the reason I never bought it when it was released. I just don't like the idea of a corporation controlling a device I have paid for.

Anyone I have spoken to do not care about company politics or what OS is installed on their device or the opaque, heavy regulation of the app store.
It comes down to one thing - applications.
This seems to be the main motive for the buying decision of many people who have an iPhone. Almost everyone I know has an iPhone.

Software is the catalyst of a hardware system. Without it the hardware is useless.

Android and IPhone are the dominent "smartphone" platforms because of the available apps.
Nobody was interested in developing software for the Palm Pre.

I don't think whether a platform is open or locked-down makes the difference - it's the applications.

Nokia needs to learn this quickly or they will be squeezed out of the "smartphone market" (I know the n900 is a computer first then phone!).

I am hoping the MeeGo is the last "jump" Nokia wll make with their choice of platform. What we need now is consistency and predicatability in the MeeGo platform and long-term focused commitment. The sooner there is a stable environment the sooner you can capture developer mindshare and enjoy a heatlhy collection of applicatons.

Then hopefully drive sales of MeeGo devices.

If Nokia don't understand this then they will lose the smartphone market like Palm. Nokia will then relagate themselves to just another handset maker and lose out to the growing smartphone market.

motorola seems to be working hard on creating much the same, but for android.

I was actually looking for a phone to replace my 2G iPhone as after 18 months, maybe 2 years, it was a little damaged and I also wanted to be able to sync my media with Linux without needing Windows.

I switched phones with my sister for a little while so was using a Samsung Galaxy for about a month, but found a few issues with Android (and the OHA in general).

1) Samsung doesn't plan on supporting the device after selling it. How can people get locked into a device for 2 years and then get no updates for it?! This is Google and the OHA's fault. They should've made the drivers for all devices that use Android open source so every android device gets the best and newest user experience.
2) The GMail application isn't as good as the iPhone Mail app.
3) Media handling is worse than N900.
4) It's not very customisable, however Swipescreen was a nice Homescreen replacement.

There are a few more things.

Anyway. I don't think Palm failed by not being 'locked in', rather they were too locked in. They were locked into a cell phone company that uses different tech to the rest of the world. Yes, AT&T use different bands for 3G, but at least they use SIM cards and GSM. The hardware felt a little flimsy and tacky. I can't speak for the Pixi, as it looks like the Palm Treo Pro I have as a work phone and apart from WM6, its a nice feeling phone.

The iPhone is still the best consumer smartphone. I hate how locked in it is, I hate how Apple is limiting it's potential and let Nokia get away with putting Expose on the N900 before Apple could do it. I was multi tasking (with services) on the iPhone when it was Jailbroken and had minimal performance losses, so the hardware can do it.

Anyway, maybe Nokia could buy Palm, if only to get hold of their patents and Synergy (but Google or Apple would probably get there first...)

A (mobile) platform is as much a product for the customer as it is for the content creator. Content creators make their selections of which platforms to deliver their contents based on some criterias, similar to how a buyer go through a phone's spec and features when we're about to commit (purchase) to a platform....

In this sense, I think companies like Apple (and Google) represent the interest of content creators better (as much as they cater to the customers) and strikes the most profitable commercial balance on their platforms.

So you publicly dismiss the whole OS because you couldn't be bothered to learn even the basic gestures to control it? Priceless.

The few minutes I used it weren't enough to form an opinion, other than I thought it strange that there was no indication there was a touch area below the display. It didn't exactly blow me away, but it didn't blow, either.

And thanks for being a jerk!

That perfectly sums up why I purchased my n900. I'm not a hardcore Linux user or anything but I know my way around a terminal. I like the power that come from using terminal.

I thought Palms WebOS did have some promise in the consumer market but it was really hurt by the carrier(sprint) and their advertising campaign. That creepy pasty chick that looked like she hadnt seen the sun in years. They made me go "Huh?" and by that i do not mean "Huh, what is this neat product they are advertising?!", i mean "Huh, wtf is up with this creepy chick???"

From some of the reviews I read the Palm Pre was also pretty unbearably slow. Start up time measured in minutes not seconds. Sluggish performance when more than a few cards were opened.

If they had fine tuned the OS, changed their marketing scheme, and gotten on a better carrier (verizon?), i think it could have been much more popular.

update: This video makes it painfully clear how slow the pre is. A phone should not take that long to simply turn on.
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-19512_7-10269415-233.html

Eric G. all I was saying was that it is ridiculous for you to make an assessment of an OS, and pronounce a verdict on it (twice) in a public forum, when you didn't even bother to work out the basic controls. Would you pronounce the same on a PC when you had no idea how to use the mouse, or on car where you had no clue what pedals were for? Now that _would_ be classic jerk behaviour.

Simple! Just flick the card up off the screen.

Simple again! Just press the centre button (or on the Plus or Pixi where the button would be).

What do you want? Idiot labels? Did you not notice the bright white LEDs in the gesture area that confirm your touch?

Had you bothered to ask the owner, (did he know you were messing with his phone?) or watch any of the countless reviews, adverts, presentations on the Pre, you'd have known all this, and appreciated how simple and fluid WebOS is to use.

I guess that goes back to why Palm was having to deploy trainers in Verizon stores, and why their whole marketing of the Pre and WebOS failed. Their "easy enough for dippy women to use" ad campaign was patronising and misplaced, and evidently too confusing for even the Erics of this world to grasp.