Should Palm And Handspring Merge?
from the why-shouldn't-they dept
To be honest, I never fully understood why Jeff Hawkins and Donna Dubinsky left Palm to create Handspring in the first place. All they did was build a device that looked exactly the same, using the same operating system, but with a slot in the back for add-on modules. Not sure why they couldn't have just added the slot into the Palm itself while they were still there. Anyway, since then, the two companies have fought against each other and dragged each other down, while Microsoft has laughed on and taken market share. Now, that Palm's CEO has left the scene, analysts are calling for the two companies to merge. I'm always a little wary of analysts telling companies who they should merge with, but here's a case where the two companies never should have been separate companies in the first place.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
I'm not sure...
I think one of the reasons Hawkins and Dubinsky left Palm was they couldn't get the springboard done and that the product development cycle had been slowed down. Just look at how fast Handspring has introduced new products compared to Palm. And they aren't afraid to go after their sacred cows. Palm is still focused on Graffiti, while the creator of Graffiti (Hawkins) has moved on to a pda/phone with a keyboard. That said, a merger might help reinvigorate Palm in the way Jobs was able to reinvigorate Apple.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Corporate Musical Chairs
If this merger ever happened, it would only be the latest twist in the bizarre game of musical chairs in Palm's corporate history. I wonder why anybody still believes that maneuvers like mergers, acquisitions and divestitures (and intra-corporate reorganizations, too) actually make a positive difference.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
I'm sure.. MS will win...
I agree with Mike. Handspring is an unnecessary company. But I'm sure it made some people lots of instant cash, so there was a reason behind forming the company. But despite the reasoning, there's no excuse for the stupidity of forming an even more competitive market when MS will swoop in and clean house. MS will win. It's only a matter of time.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
microsoft?
microsoft doesn't make PDA's. they make an OS for PDA's. why does no one seem to remember that? PocketPC is not a pocket pc, it is a pocket pc os.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: microsoft?
Indeed, but each sale of a Microsoft OS based PDA is a sale that Palm or Handspring has lost. That's competition... anyone who makes you lose a sale, whether a direct competitor or not, is a competitor.
Microsoft doesn't make PCs either, but they hurt Apple in exactly the same way...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: microsoft?
Who said MS made or has to make a PDA? Palm also makes an OS. I'm sorry I didn't make it more clear. Palm's OS marketshare will probably shrink to nothing. MS will win the PDA OS battle. Who knows if Palm can survive just making hardware? Maybe. I doubt it though....
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
The Apple connection
When Steve Jobs cancelled the Newton Inc spin-off, most of the Newton staff moved to Palm.
This staff had "rosetta" ported to palm hardware in under 6 months. The problem? The Newton engineers had 'Apple intellectual property', so to implement real handwriting or ARM based palms would require time to avoid Apple's legal staff. About 2 years, in fact.
Palm Corporate wanted to move to real handwriting....and this would have ment the death of Graffitti-the baby of the founders. Hawkins/Dubinsky felt this is WHY palm succedded, and therefore went off on thier own.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment