We strongly believe that the best days for webOS are still ahead.
Thus spake Meg Whitman in her memo to the troops, an intramural rendition of HP’s official announcement that webOS will be “contributed” to the Open Source community.
…the executive team has been working to determine the best path forward for this highly respected software. We looked at all the options in the market today…By providing webOS to the open source community…we have the potential to fundamentally change the landscape.
Either she thinks we’re dimwits, or she’s being cleverly cheeky. Does she think we’ll fall for the tired corpospeak? “Victory! WhatWereWeThinking v3.0 has been released to the Open Source community”. Or is she slyly fessing up? “After much abuse inside the HP cage, it’s clear that webOS can only be restored to health if released into the wild.”
Releasing a product as Open Source isn’t always an admission of failure; see exhibits Linux or, more recently, WebKit. But the successful Open Source offerings were created in Open Source form. They weren’t “contributed” in a last-ditch effort to save face after unsuccessful attempts to monetize a proprietary version.
Furthermore, there’s real money to be made with an Open Source product…if you know what you’re doing. Look at Red Hat: nicely profitable, with nearly a $10B market cap. They make a lot of money selling Linux…or, more accurately, by selling a Linux “distro”, a suite of products and services that surround the free Linux kernel. They make money the iTunes way: Customers won’t pay for tunes that are otherwise (more or less legally) freely available, but they will pay for services around the music.
So is Open Source the way to go for webOS? I don’t think so.
Let’s look at Symbian, a product that’s similar to webOS in its complicated history: Born at Psion; moved to a Nokia-Motorola-Ericsson-Matsushita-Psion joint venture; thrown into Open Source by the Symbian Foundation, an even more complicated JV. Lately, things have become even murkier as Symbian appears to have been “outsourced to Accenture”.
Adobe’s Flex is another kicked-to-the-kerb example. When HTML5 appeared to displace Flash, Adobe officially open-sourced Flex to the non-profit Apache Software Foundation.
Even the success of Firefox, certainly the most visible Open Source application, might not be as indisputable as we first thought. With net assets of $120M at the end of 2009, the “non-profit” Mozilla Foundation, Firefox’s progenitor, has been the great Open Source success story. 2009 revenues were $104 million, most of which was generated by sending searches to Google from the Firefox browser. In other words, Google has been Firefox’ sugar daddy as the Mountain View company battles Microsoft’s Internet Explorer quasi-monopoly.
But things have changed. Google Chrome is in its ascendancy; Google points to security holes in Firefox. Firefox served at Google’s pleasure, but is no longer needed.
Not exactly a bona fides Open Source success.
(Ironically — or at least amusingly — Meg Whitman singled out Firefox as an example of Open Source success in a post-announcement interview. To add tech credentials to appearance, she had HP director, venture investor, and Netscape founder Marc Andreessen sitting by her side. We won’t dwell on the admission that trotting out Andreessen represents.)
A closer look at HP’s official statements makes things even less clear:
HP will engage the open source community to help define the charter of the open source project under a set of operating principles:
. The goal of the project is to accelerate the open development of the webOS platform
. HP will be an active participant and investor in the project
. Good, transparent and inclusive governance to avoid fragmentation
. Software will be provided as a pure open source project
HP also will contribute ENYO, the application framework for webOS, to the community in the near future along with a plan for the remaining components of the user space.
Beginning today, developers and customers are invited to provide input and suggestions at http://developer.palm.com/blog/.
This is language designed to obfuscate rather than clarify, filled with qualifiers and weasel words. Read it again and ask yourself: Is there even one actionable sentence? are we given numbers, dates, some measurable commitment?
No. Instead, we get lame HR-like phrases:
. HP will engage the open source community — in what kind of embrace?
. active participant and investor — by how much and when?
. transparent and inclusive governance — why not opaque and exclusionary?
. a pure open source project — as opposed to yesterday’s impure and proprietary?
. near future… along with a plan — we don’t know, we’re just saying
Nowhere does Whitman state how much money, how many people, or when things might coalesce.
Allow me to translate:
We tried and tried and found no takers for webOS. Android is too strong, our old partner Microsoft leaned on us, and webOS is seen as damaged goods. We used the Open Source exit to get kudos from vocal enthusiasts. We know it’s cynical, but what do you want us to say? Good bye and good luck?
The charade (and cynicism) doesn’t stop there. Now we’re told HP might make webOS-powered tablets. Not in 2012, that year’s roadmap has been inked, HP is committed to Windows 8 tablets. Maybe in 2013. That, ladies and gentlemen, attests to HP’s unwavering commitment to webOS.
By 2013 there will be tablets coming from all the usual suspects (except RIM): Samsung, Googorola and other Android players, Amazon, Microsoft’s OEMs and newly acquired subsidiary Nokia…and, of course, Apple’s iPad HD2.
When I hear Whitman make such statements, I’m reminded of the old joke about the difference between a computer salesperson and a used-car salesman: The used-car gent knows he’s lying. For my alma mater’s sake, for HP’s good, let’s hope Meg Whitman knows she’s putting us on.
Related columns:
- WebOS Everywhere Tweetby Jean-Louis Gassée Where have we heard a similar mantra? Despite their apparent divorce from Microsoft, it sounds like HP’s brains have been infected with a mutation of the “Windows Everywhere” virus. Let’s recap. Late April 2010, HP acquires Palm for $1.2B. In July 2010, then-CEO Mark Hurd tells us he didn’t buy WebOS just [...]...
- HP’s Tortured WebOS Positioning TweetAs an old HP fan, the rebirth of WebOS is painful to watch. Palm, after missing the ‘‘App Phone’’ transition was effectiv ely taken over by an investor group led by Elevation Partners. They promptly installed Jon Rubinstein as CEO, banking on his successful Apple experience to breathe new life into Palm. He did: In [...]...





21 Comments
Did you mean “curb”?
He’s using Britishisms.
@ Nick: kerb is a “received” spelling, as they say in the UK http://j.mp/rTK1kz
webOS is a child that has been abused and there are many people out there who have wanted it to be open source for a while. Those people really don’t give a damn about how this makes HP look as long as HP does it so webOS can be under their care.
As for me, I expect China to release a ton of webOS hardware as they did for Android. webOS, freed, might indeed have its best days ahead of it.
I’m really struggling to figure out why this blog post exists. It exists to bully and pick on HP over their choice of wording and the fact that the CEO made a rather fast (arguably bold and generous) decision to donate valuable software to the public, but in those short couple of weeks hasn’t disentangled the software fully from its proprietary components and posted it? You are whining like a pissant about how there’s not yet a free deliverable or any specifics? Are you owed more than that from HP? What’s the takeaway here?
@ Lee: Thanks for sharing your invigorating thoughts. Imagine HP saying the following: Today is the first day of the webOS Foundation to which we’re transfering all webOS code under an Open Source licence, as well as all other related IP and manpower. The webOS foundation is headed by W. E. Bos, the distinguished software engineers who led webOS development. Further, to facilitate a smooth start, we’re providing $100M in seed funding for the new entity.
Instead, we get what? No date, no structure, no IP licensing, nothing. Just politically correct words, nothing actionable.
I have a great debt to the old Bill and Dave HP, they gave me my firrst and decisive job many moons ago. I’m sorry to see it stumble time and again, CEO after CEO.
Lee, why not take Mr Gasseé at his word? He makes the claim that this is a cynical move by the new CEO of HP to unload webOS and that it will lead to its marginalization. Maybe he is right in which case his account might be accurate. If it (webOS) sprouts wings and takes off like linux then his credibility as interpreter of events in high tech will take a hit.
Of course linux and webOS have very different origins, which is an important part of the narrative so optimism has to be tempered (to say the least). But in any case we can reliably hope the release of vast amounts of apparently well crafted code will contribute to the improvement of those who take the time to study it.
Firefox isn’t the only package which started out proprietary and ended up released under an open license. There are several very notable examples. MySQL was close-sourced until 2000. OpenOffice and subsequently LibreOffice grew out of the proprietary StarOffice package. The popular QT toolkit and widget library existing under a string of only semi-free license before adopting broadly accepted and useful options.
The situation with WebOS is also somewhat unique. Most of the stack is comprised of packages which exist independently and are already actively maintained – linux, pulse audio, gstreamer, webkit, node.js, etc. These components are already maintained and improved by the open source community.
And of course some of the parts that are currently proprietary are not tightly coupled. The web frameworks (Mojo, Enyo) work well enough with stock WebKit that Chrome works as a development environment. Even if WebOS as a distinct platform died, Enyo could easily live on as a platform bridging Android, iOS and ChromeOS, as well as desktop browses like Chromium and Safari.
Jean-Louise & Steve:
Thanks. Point received. I for one am tired of the cynicism and pessimism surrounding the announcement, because I personally believe this is the very best thing that could have happened to webOS, regardless of its history of failure. It’s hard to imagine it could be handled any worse by its future care-takers and as long as some of the code ends up in the public domain in my opinion it’s a better result than anyone could have expected.
It’s hard for anyone, public or in the industry, to think webOS has a bright future when folks have nothing to do but declare it dead, repeatedly, no matter what the news. If HP had announced new units available for purchase next month 99% of blogs would have the same reaction as this. Granted, that HP started delcaring it dead hasn’t helped =) I don’t think we should expect anything other than foibles.
At the very beginning Android was the first choice for Chinese phone and tablet manufacturers, because is was totally free and the source was accessible. Now as Android is continually threatened by legal actions, WebOS may seem a safe choice for smaller companies which has limited source for legal battles.
Being decidedly negative (or positive) at this stage is really premature, in my humble opinion.
I personnally believe that Jean-Louis’s evaluation is correct. This is an half-baked attempt at getting rid of WebOS and its terrible side-effects for HP. And quite frankly, they do not make a lot of effort to hide it.
I also nonetheless agree that open-sourcing is the best thing that could happen to WebOS. Both sentences can be correct together.
I totally agree with JLG and think that the answer needs more specifics as he pointed out. That being said after Leo ouster there has been the big dark clouds over HP’s head. HP is simply announcing the decision on what to do with WebOS which has been a looming question mark. Certainly there is no additional specifics. I did speak with top officials there on Friday and the investment will not be a “material” investment (translation: not much).
Meg Whitman and team are just trying to clear the “decks” on the big question marks that were looming. I didn’t see this announcement as a comprehensive one but important to signal progress.
It’s not good for open source if companies “contribute” failed products to the open source community, so the open source community can “fix” the product. With good management, a vision and a strategy open sourcing a proprietary software can be a good move. But especially when the software is supposed to power mobile devices, it takes a lot of expertise and close work with hardware vendors to make a product fly.
I’ve had a webOS device since they day the launched it in Germany. Of all the smartphones I’ve been working with, it was one with the most crashes – while delivering one of the best user experiences. Other friends in the mobile industry have reported the same: serious stability and performance problems.
The amount of work or money it would take to turn webOS into a successful, high-performance smartphone platform is more than the open source community building up around webOS could deliver within the next 12 months.
If one of the big players – like Samsung – would pick up webOS, it might be a different story. Let’s see what the license is going to be like, I doubt that HP would be happy if Samsung, LG or some other player would just be able to re-commercialize the platform.
Open Source can indeed be successful, if managed, nurtured and supported by a talented team. This was the case for Linux, and to some extent for Firefox. I am not criticizing the WebOS team here: they did very well under very difficult circumstances. But where is the team that will maintain Open Sourced WebOS? Will HP contribute resources? The engineering managers behind WebOS left long ago. What are the engineers doing? Joining a not-created-yet consortium? Guess what…
@JLG: Meg knows, don’t worry about it. She is not perfect, but not stupid either, far from it.
This has so many parallels with Herman Cain’s “Plan B.” Vague objectives, no planning and little substance. But don’t worry it will be great.
WebOS really only matters to small groups of people. Those that own a TouchPad looking for possible future upgrades and some support, a couple of guys in a garage looking for an OS for their low budget tablet and the modder community that likes to shoehorn random roms on commercial devices.
I don’t think a big OEM is going to adopt it in place of Android, even with its legal troubles, and RIM has bet the farm on QNX. Having said that, I really don’t think HP saved it from death row or resurrected it to resume its former life. They more or less killed it dead and then decided to bring it back as a zombie.
@ Marco: I have no doubt about Meg’s IQ, she’s probably Mensa level (160+). But… weasel words are weasel words. I think releasing webOS as Open Source is the right thing to do given circumstances, i.e. given the fact no one wanted to buy it. But, behind the smoke screen of the announcement, nothing is _done_ : no structure, so IP agreement, no staffing, no budget (writing/improving/managing Open Source code isn’t free, ask GOOG.
Instead, we have words like ”HP will engage the open source community”…
How about the HP/Palm people working on webOS? Given the absence of hard numbers, don’t we think they’re all going to flee the coop and go work at Facebook, Googorola or Apple? All these companies complain they can’t find engineers. To say nothing of Oracle or IBM, very active in mobile development. Who isn’t?
It seems more and more people agree with JLG evaluation :
http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/mobile-cloud-view/hp-leaves-webos-wounded-not-even-dead/
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/open-source-webos-is-dead-on-arrival/10003
good post,thank you share it,i like it very much
I love HP, I have notebook from them.
I am not in favor of HP. I did not have too much of a happy experiences with it!
2 Trackbacks
[...] Filloux / Monday Note: HP Kicks webOS To The Kerb — We strongly believe that the best days for webOS are still ahead. — Thus spake Meg [...]
[...] [...]