If geeks love it, we’re on it

My journey from WebOS to Android

My journey from WebOS to Android

Palm Pre Custerf*ck

When Palm announced the launch of their new smartphone platform, it was a pretty big deal, and created a lot of buzz in the smartphone community. Palm’s proof of concept—with their innovative multitasking interface—was widely praised, attracting the attention of Sprint, who signed on with WebOS as an exclusive carrier.

Palm, a relatively small company with a very big reputation in the portable device industry, was relying mostly on Sprint’s powerful marketing arm to catapult their new cutting-edge device into the mainstream. I was an early adopter of the Palm Pre, purchasing the phone two weeks after it came out.

From a geek’s standpoint, there were obvious advantages to using WebOS, especially when compared to the current generation of iOS. Not only was it capable of multitasking, something Apple wouldn’t master until much later, the task switching interface was incredibly intuitive, and easy enough for your average end user to figure out.

The initial launch, however, was not as successful as Palm and Sprint had imagined. The initial development platform for WebOS was a dismal failure. Palm’s development team had enough on their hands to deal with bug fixes and issuing updates. It took too long for Palm to put together a sufficient development platform, and the app catalog suffered greatly because of it.

Those of us who bought WebOS phones were left to develop our own apps, and the “homebrew” community essentially took over. You see, WebOS was the only product on the market that allowed you to “root” a phone easily so you could develop your own apps. All you had to do was type in the Konami code, set it to Developer Mode, and reboot the device. This resulted in two completely different app catalogs. The Palm store held all the licensed, commercial apps for WebOS, while the open source Preware app allowed everyone and their brother to spread around free utilities, apps, customizations, and hacks. Linux developers dominated the homebrew community, and started digging into the guts of the WebOS platform. Packages like Uberkernel and Govnah allowed users to overclock/underclock their processor and optimize the I/O scheduler and TCP congestion handlers, as well as compressing all or part of your swap partition and optimize memory usage.

Surprisingly, Palm never gave much resistance to the homebrew community, and eventually they ended up greatly influencing the development of the phone. Homebrew patches would fix bugs before Palm could release updates, and those patches would eventually end up getting streamlined into official updates. The second version of WebOS adopted compcache and many other optimizations that were previously only available through hacks.

Still, the platform was struggling to keep up with Android and iOS in availability of powerful apps, especially when it came to new social media tools. Hacks and patches were providing an experience that no other smartphone platform could offer, but users were having to wait six months to a year for mainstream apps to become available. Some developers ignored WebOS altogether.

Alright People, Move along. Nothing to see here.To further complicate things, Sprint appeared to be trying to sweep the whole platform under the rug. New phones were released with new styles and upgraded hardware, which became available on AT&T and Verizon, while Sprint users were still stuck with the original phones. Even this didn’t stop users from taking apart their Verizon and AT&T phones, swapping out the communications board for Sprint hardware, and reconfiguring the phones to work on the Sprint network. Towards the end of my days with WebOS, I was using a Verizon Palm Pre Plus that had been converted to the Sprint network using the “FrankenPre” process.

Two years went by and the contracts of early adopters like myself were coming to an end. It was time to upgrade, and most of us were still willing to stick with the platform. Sprint, however, continued to resist WebOS, now owned by HP, and offered nothing to the users who were loyal to the platform from day one. I held out until mid-July of this year, and after having some complications with my hackjob of a phone, called it quits and moved to Android.

While I realize that hindsight is always 20/20, I still can’t help but wonder why I didn’t make the move to Android sooner. Within a couple of days of using my new Android device I started to realize that I was missing out on a lot more than I thought. All of the apps I want to use are available, work better, and have more features than their WebOS counterpart, assuming that an app for WebOS even exists. The plethora of features that Google offers with the Android platform are miles ahead of the stock apps that are available with WebOS. After using the phone for a couple of months, I’m starting to realize how silly it was to hold on to WebOS for as long as I did, essentially because it had a better task manager. I got too caught up in the phone’s potential to realize that there were more powerful forces at play.

HP announced recently that they are giving up on WebOS for good, halted production on the WebOS tablet, and dumped their inventory through a fire sale. I believe Sprint played the largest role in the demise of WebOS, but I can’t say that I blame them. In the end, Google provided a more profitable business model, and supported it with their top notch marketing arm. Neither Palm or HP could provide that to Sprint, and a product can only last so long on principle alone.

Now I’m left with a pile of broken Palm Pres, most of them in pieces, and the ghosts of all the apps I bought through the Palm/HP store still haunt me to this day. As I slowly build up my app library, I think back on all the expensive mistakes my curiosity of technology has gotten me into. I wouldn’t change a thing though, as these mistakes in judgment have led to a deeper appreciation for technology, and experiences that I will take with me for the rest of my life.

And there you have it, that’ll be the last article I write about WebOS. (or is it?)

Comments

  1. CrazyJoe
    CrazyJoe I feel your pain... As we've talked through Epics and such, I loved my Palm Pre, but came to the same conclusion a bit earlier and moved on to the Samsung Epic... I do love my new Android Phone... I also tried to no avail to get one of the $99 HP Touchpads...
  2. Thrax
    Thrax And a look backwards at why I thought Palm was gonna lose.

    Good article, Norm.
  3. Linc
    Linc Interesting stuff; didn't know all that was happening behind the scenes of the WebOS community.
  4. djmeph
    djmeph
    Thrax wrote:
    And a look backwards at why I thought Palm was gonna lose.

    Good article, Norm.

    Yes, you were right. But you can see by my reply that I mostly agreed with you, and I was really just hoping that they'd eventually get it together. I thought they took a lot of great steps to make the platform more viable after you wrote that article. There's evidence that they had been trying to seduce Sprint with a roided out phone and offered them exclusivity on both the phone and the new version of WebOS. They kept dangling us along with "leaks" and "rumors" but in the end, they couldn't reach a deal with Sprint and there certainly weren't enough new customers on Verizon and AT&T to carry on the platform. I think HP even tried to suggest that we stick with our original Palm Pres and instead of upgrading, get a HP Touchpad that you can connect to the phone through bluetooth, or something really lame like that.
    Lincoln wrote:
    Interesting stuff; didn't know all that was happening behind the scenes of the WebOS community.
    I would say it's highly probable that WebOS would have died sooner had it not been for the homebrew community. There were times when I could tell that Palm was really in over their heads.
  5. Thrax
    Thrax All dev issues aside, I think palm could've been a contender had it refreshed quickly with a superphone. The hardware was just sooooo uninspiring for an enthusiast-positioned product. :(

    I want many of webOS' UI innovations on Android.
  6. djmeph
    djmeph
    Thrax wrote:
    All dev issues aside, I think palm could've been a contender had it refreshed quickly with a superphone. The hardware was just sooooo uninspiring for an enthusiast-positioned product. :(

    I want many of webOS' UI innovations on Android.
    The keyword there being "quickly" they had the Pre 2 and Pre 3, which would have been great had each phone been released about 6 months earlier, and been picked up by Sprint. They also had at one point toyed with the mother of all slabs, which was rumored to have actually been designed by Samsung, but it only existed in rumors and a shoddy photo.
  7. Cliff_Forster
    Cliff_Forster I'm still using a Pre Plus, but I would not call myself a smart phone enthusiast. I actually think guys like me are a massive part of the market. We want email, a good calender, basic web browser, and to flick the occasional angry bird, location services for google maps, a facebook update from time to time, its all I really want.

    They could have gone to market saying, here we are, the smart phone for practical sensible people. Maybe even the smart phone for business as an alternative to the offerings from RIM, but they did nothing to differentiate in marketing and so this wonderful portable OS goes to waste.

    I had some hope for them when HP showed up to buy, but if Palm marketed poorly, HP was completely incompetent. My hope is that HP will cut its losses and just make it open source as a PR move rather than just kill it forever.
  8. primesuspect
    primesuspect You're right, Cliff. My dad is like you. He had a Palm Pre and it was perfect for him. He wanted GPS and Gmaps, email, and pictures. Now he has an Android phone and he doesn't like it. It's too complicated for him.
  9. PirateNinja
    PirateNinja I think there is a good chance HTC will pick up webOS and continue to work it exclusive to their hardware. I'm really hoping that happens.
  10. Snarkasm
    Snarkasm What are people doing with Android's GPS, Google Maps, Email, and Gallery that are so much more baffling than however webOS does it?
  11. Thrax
    Thrax I mean, at the end of the day, iPhone/webOS/Android have pretty much the same UI. Click icons, read what buttons say, press buttons. Like, I don't get how one is more complicated than another.
  12. Cliff_Forster
    Cliff_Forster
    Thrax wrote:
    I mean, at the end of the day, iPhone/webOS/Android have pretty much the same UI. Click icons, read what buttons say, press buttons. Like, I don't get how one is more complicated than another.

    WebOS is just more natural and logical in its design. The gestures just make sense. If you have used WebOS 2.0 the card stacking and fanning for multitasking is brilliant. The simple ability to "minimize" apps and scroll through them one at a time, or stack them, and when you are done simply flick them away. The added touch sensitive area under the touch screen, a point of contention for some, I think its brilliant to swipe back to go back, its extraordinarily natural once you use it. The way notifications are managed, easily accessed, or flicked away, is also very nice.

    To me, IOS and Android don't feel like a UI, they just feel like a collection of application launchers.
  13. Thrax
    Thrax In turn, one could argue that memorizing Palm's array of non-standard gestures is more complicated then simply pressing "home" when you're done with an app or "back" if you want to go back a screen.

    If anything, Android and iOS are most like windows. Minimize the app and click an icon to start another one. That's what people are familiar with, not Palm's way.

    I will not argue that Palm's way isn't brilliant... just not any "easier".
  14. ardichoke
    ardichoke I do kind of wish WebOS had taken off more. Their hacker/homebrew community was impressive, even when compared to Androids and that UI was sexy. Alas, HP's stupidity won out over their innovation.
  15. PirateNinja
    PirateNinja http://www.rethink-wireless.com/2011/09/20/hp-lay-500-webos-unit-staff.htm

    This is the kind of stuff that makes me think if HTC is going to buy webos, they are going to announce it in the next few days. The platform loses a ton of value if HTC does not retain at least some of the essential HR that built it. HP is going to lay off the staff because it pressures another company in to buying the platform quickly and gives them negotiation clout (that and there is no reason to keep this huge staff).

    Samsung has their own, seemingly well made, OS to use against Google if necessary. Nokia seems to be stuck with Windows Mobile. I just don't know who else would buy it ... come on HTC....do it!
  16. Cliff_Forster
    Cliff_Forster I think HTC is happy enough being a "me too" supplier of Android phones. I hope you are right, I just don't think we will see it.

    I don't see anyone paying anything substantial for WebOS at this point. There is no money to be made developing for the fifth place platform. The only way HP can spin anything positive out of this debacle is to open it up and give it to the home brew community to do whatever they want with it. They can spin it as a gift to the world.

    The only other possibility I can see is maybe one of the pre paid carriers looks at it as a differentiated platform they can offer customers without paying exorbitant licencing fees, lowering the cost of pre paid smart phones. I could see a company like Cricket doing it if they could partner with their hardware vendors to make really inexpensive smart phones to compete in that space of the pre paid market. That first cost is such a huge driver for the consumer, when they compare and Iphone with a two year contract and going pre paid all they can see is $200 for the top of the line, vs. $250 for a gimped android 1.6 phone on a pre paid carrier. Does not matter to them that they will save as much as $700 over the life of the phone all they see is that first cost. I could see a pre paid provider saying, okay, if we could completely get away from license fees on handsets and offer our vendors an opportunity to build around the WebOS software platform, could we build cheap smart phones.... Maybe then it would be valued as a way for pre paid to compete. And just think of the great tech headlines, Pre now pre paid....
  17. ardichoke
    ardichoke If only HP had handled the WebOS thing better, they might have had a shot at actually licensing it out to other companies. They actually said that they were going to do that, but the way they did it was basically like saying "We're going to license WebOS out, but not make devices because you just can't make money selling WebOS devices."
  18. PirateNinja
    PirateNinja Well if HTC doesn't buy WebOS, they may end up with meego or their own in house OS. If they want to stop paying such hefty royalties for Android while at the same time protect themselves from that Motorola acquisition ... they need to do something. HTC has the potential to provide the sexy hardware to webOS that HP could not. The culture of innovation at HTC trumps HP imo, and I think they could actually pull of a third time's the charm with WebOS. Whatever Wang does, she will go full force with it and pull it off...just like she did getting first to market with touch screens.

    Have faith in the Wang.
  19. ardichoke
    ardichoke HTC using WebOS, Meego, or just about anything else isn't going to help protect them from the royalties they are paying right now. The fact of the matter is, Microsoft, Apple and a million other tech companies have patents that cover ridiculously basic functionality which makes Meego, WebOS, etc. just as vulnerable as Android is.

    With regards to your statement about protecting themselves from the Motorola acquisition, that's just patently false. In fact, Google already sold them 100 patents from the Motorola library with which to defend themselves against Apple's lawsuits. Google has made it quite clear that they plan on using the Motorola Mobility patents to protect their Android partners, not to attack them.
  20. PirateNinja
    PirateNinja
    ardichoke wrote:
    With regards to your statement about protecting themselves from the Motorola acquisition, that's just patently false....

    Zing! I guess I am speaking to broad and setting myself up for this sort of thing.

    Puns aside, I'm talking about the $5 per android device HTC has to pay to Microsoft. as a result of HTC vs Microsoft litigation. They wouldn't have to do that for WebOS based phones.

    Meanwhile, when I say protect themselves from the Motorola acquisition, I mean protect themselves from the future prospect of Google keeping the most competitive and/or newest Android builds in house and thus charming significant portions of consumers in to buying Motorola devices instead of HTC (or Samsung for that matter).

    On top of that it gives them more freedom regarding innovation. It's forward integration, and although NEITHER OF US can say what the future holds ALL I AM SAYING is that IMHO there is good chance HTC acquires or develops it's own OS and I hope they choose WebOS.

    Now let me have my opinion and share it too. (cake pun)
  21. Thrax
    Thrax
    Meanwhile, when I say protect themselves from the Motorola acquisition, I mean protect themselves from the future prospect of Google keeping the most competitive and/or newest Android builds in house and thus charming significant portions of consumers in to buying Motorola devices instead of HTC (or Samsung for that matter).

    The only evidence we have on this topic is contradictory, wisely so. It would be suicidal for the Android platform to lock down in this manner.
  22. ardichoke
    ardichoke
    Puns aside, I'm talking about the $5 per android device HTC has to pay to Microsoft. as a result of HTC vs Microsoft litigation. They wouldn't have to do that for WebOS based phones.

    [citation needed]

    From what I've seen, what HTC is paying Microsoft for has more to do with the Linux underpinnings of Android (which are shared by Meego and WebOS) than anything else. The only company, which I'm aware of, that has litigated for anything that is Android specific is Oracle suing Google over the implementation of Java in Android. All the other Android-related litigation (once again, that I'm aware of) has to do with generic mobile technologies that likely apply to every other system out there as well. Android is just the target because they're the biggest player in the game currently.
  23. PirateNinja
    PirateNinja
    ardichoke wrote:
    [citation needed]

    http://www.asymco.com/2011/05/27/microsoft-has-received-five-times-more-income-from-android-than-from-windows-phone/

    That is counter to what you are seeing in every way.

    Per Thrax's comment, if Google used Motorola as their "Prime" platform (sort of like how they are using Samsung right now) from here on out, then Motorola would get a significant sales edge. How is that suicidal? They can trickle the newer versions of Android to the other OEMs 3 months later and slowly garnish big market shares without killing the platform.
  24. Thrax
    Thrax 1) Don't shit where you sleep. The OEMs would find a way to bail.

    2) Don't shit where you sleep. Competing against your own manufacturers is a bad idea.

    3) Don't shit where you sleep. Risking the business model that gave you 40% of the smartphone market for ultimately meaningless preferential treatment is no benefit.

    4) Potential anti-trust concerns.

    5) Less flexibility for consumers, which Google has a pretty sterling track record of avoiding.

    6) They've flat-out said they're not going to.
  25. ardichoke
    ardichoke

    No, it is not. It does not actually say what the patents are for. That's the point. I never disputed that HTC was paying Microsoft licensing fees on it's Android phones. The patents are most likely not exclusively violated by Android. Most of the patent attacks on Android have to do with extremely generic concepts that any other mobile platform would be just as susceptible to. Until you show exactly what patents they are licensing and demonstrate that WebOS or Meego do not violate any of these patents, my point stands.
  26. PirateNinja
    PirateNinja Oh my gosh, you guys. Will keep this all in mind in the future when I speculate .. I'm trying to tell you this is my opinion and you two are like ... ya well YOU'RE WRONG!

    Ardi:
    I gave you the citation you requested.
    You said:
    The only company, which I'm aware of, that has litigated for anything that is Android specific is Oracle suing Google over the implementation of Java in Android.
    My citation says:
    Microsoft is suing other Android phone makers, and it’s looking for $7.50 to $12.50 per device, says Pritchard.

    which IS counter to what you said when you had to jump in here and pull the your opinion is wrong jig.

    If you want to know the exact details of that lawsuit, and I get them for you, and I'm right that HTC will NOT have to pay Microsoft the same royalty fee if they acquire WebOS ... then you agree to buy me a beer right now otherwise I'm not looking it up. Of course, I will buy you a beer if I am wrong.
    What say you?

    Per Thrax's where to and not to shit analysis:
    Yes, you could be right. Companies shit in a lot of places though, and the certainly flat out say a lot of things. Well see what the future holds.
  27. Thrax
    Thrax Duder, Ardichoke is saying that Oracle is suing Android specifically because a specific component of Android allegedly violates an Oracle patent.

    Microsoft's suit is different because it is based on alleged ownership of technologies in Linux. Android is not the only thing Microsoft has gone after on this premise. What Ardi is saying is legal teams pick and choose their battles, and Android was a very lucrative one to pursue. And (this being the important point), webOS is Linux-based and therefore subject to the very same suits. It was too small a fish to fry before, but what if a major OEM like HTC picks it up? Well hello revenue stream.

    The difference is subtle, but important.
  28. PirateNinja
    PirateNinja Microsoft's suit is different because it is based on alleged ownership of technologies in Linux.
    This is the entire assumption that I am saying could be false. So I went ahead and did my homework here even though Ardichoke didn't agree to buy me a beer if I was right.

    That patent agreement between HTC and Microsoft is not public. You can skip the rest of this knowing none of us can find out if the above assumption is true.

    It is mentioned here:
    http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2010/apr10/04-27mshtcpr.mspx

    After reading a ton of other speculation about exactly what technologies the HTC Android devices infringed on ... I gave up and wrote requests for information to Microsoft and HTC's PR departments. I told them I was a business analyst representing an important group of investors (Thrax and Ardichoke).
    We all know they are going to delete my emails and not respond.

    With that said, all the speculation by those who actually looked over Microsoft's patent base and the HTC Android device capabilities, the only two patents it seems the Internet collectively agrees on are about ActiveSync and ClearType ... neither of which are specific to generalized Linux technologies.

    Another thing not being mentioned here is that Microsoft is in general (Apple too for that matter) trying to make it difficult on OEMs to produce Android phones. It isn't about the relatively small revenue streams they get from their IP agreements. It's about fighting for their own respective platforms.

    That being said I otherwise agree on the concept that companies only for patent infringement when it makes sense ... ie. revenue stream.


    I still don't think HTC would have publicly admitted considering the purchase of WebOS if they thought it was going to
    1. Not alleviate them from the patent pressures in some way
    2. Not provide them with some level of protection from Google that comes with owning your software platform.

    I guess what this comes down to is two arguments AND two schools of thought for each:

    The Protection Theory Argument
    1. The Motorola acquisition was done by Google to protect OEMs who want to sell Android devices from IP infringement lawsuits
    or
    2. The Motorola acquisition was Google integrating in to a new market that it actually plans to compete in on it's own

    The Bigger Reason for IP Agreement Theory
    1. Microsoft goes after Android platforms to restrict the competitiveness of the Android platform
    or
    2. Microsoft goes after Android platforms for revenue streams from OEMs



    Given our limited sources of information here, all we can do is speculate which is all I was trying to do three posts ago.

    I may end up being wrong about HTC and WebOS ... but I'm sticking with my speculation because I think my logic is as sound as it can be given our limited information.

    I have spent way too much time Interneting today.
  29. PirateNinja
    PirateNinja PS.
    After some back and forth with Microsoft's PR company they have genuinely agreed to look in to this for me. I'll let you know when they respond.
  30. djmeph
    djmeph
    ardichoke wrote:
    If only HP had handled the WebOS thing better, they might have had a shot at actually licensing it out to other companies. They actually said that they were going to do that, but the way they did it was basically like saying "We're going to license WebOS out, but not make devices because you just can't make money selling WebOS devices."
    thats not at all what they said, or at least not what they meant. they did design new phones and a tablet, but they also said they would license to oems under two conditions. 1. the phone could not share a platform with another phone like the samsung galaxy s. 2. they would be under strict rules to not fuck with the interface, like samsung does with their android phones. they wanted to make sure the experience stayed consistent across the platform an that updates could be streamlined efficiently.
  31. djmeph
    djmeph trust me, this is not hps fault. they did everything they could to get sprint to continue the brand. sprint is fully responsible for sinking webos.
  32. djmeph
    djmeph
    Well if HTC doesn't buy WebOS, they may end up with meego or their own in house OS. If they want to stop paying such hefty royalties for Android while at the same time protect themselves from that Motorola acquisition ... they need to do something. HTC has the potential to provide the sexy hardware to webOS that HP could not. The culture of innovation at HTC trumps HP imo, and I think they could actually pull of a third time's the charm with WebOS. Whatever Wang does, she will go full force with it and pull it off...just like she did getting first to market with touch screens.

    Have faith in the Wang.
    HP is a much bigger company than HtC. they have no problem keeping up with the rest of the market hardware wise
  33. djmeph
    djmeph
    Thrax wrote:
    In turn, one could argue that memorizing Palm's array of non-standard gestures is more complicated then simply pressing "home" when you're done with an app or "back" if you want to go back a screen.

    If anything, Android and iOS are most like windows. Minimize the app and click an icon to start another one. That's what people are familiar with, not Palm's way.

    I will not argue that Palm's way isn't brilliant... just not any "easier".

    I don't think anyone is saying that WebOS is any easier to use, just that it's more intuitive. Most people who have used WebOS for any extensive period of time will say that the functionality just makes sense. With any device you're going to have to use it a while before figuring out how it works and being able to use it efficiently. Just like using a real keyboard vs touch-screen keyboard, eventually you'll get used to it either way, no matter what your initial preference is. I always felt that WebOS did a really great job of compartmentalizing your experience in a way that makes it so it's not just the operating system that is multitasking, it's making it easier for your brain to multitask along with it. There isn't a day that goes by that I don't run into a situation with my Android where I wish I could just see what another app is doing without taking the risk of it closing or resetting automatically when I switch back. When I open the task manager, not all of the apps that are running show up in the list, even though I know they are running. And at least with WebOS I know when a program is running in the background, because it will quickly display an icon or message in my notifications. From my experience, Andoid and iOS are still very linear in the way apps are handled, you essentially have only one screen showing at a time. WebOS doesn't allow you to manipulate app windows quite as complexly as you can with any modern desktop OS, but it's certainly a huge step up from the other platforms.
  34. Snarkasm
    Snarkasm There's just a fundamental difference between the platforms. In Android, you're always multitasking. Unless you force an application to quit, it's going to maintain its last state (and for apps that run services, their services will continue to run), regardless of whether it's still in active memory or it's halted entirely and its state is saved down to the device storage. "Seeing what another app is doing" is as simple as launching the application. Unless the app is coded poorly, there's no reason for it to reset just because you hit the home button and launched something else.

    Stuff that's actively being used in the background can also drop information into the notification bar. Spotify, while playing, shows song information there; Tasker shows which current profiles are active; Email displays a notification if you have new mails; Twitter shows if you have new messages or mentions.

    Does that make sense? Basically, you can safely assume that unless you reboot your phone, your applications should always be exactly where you left them.
  35. djmeph
    djmeph
    Snarkasm wrote:
    There's just a fundamental difference between the platforms. In Android, you're always multitasking. Unless you force an application to quit, it's going to maintain its last state (and for apps that run services, their services will continue to run), regardless of whether it's still in active memory or it's halted entirely and its state is saved down to the device storage. "Seeing what another app is doing" is as simple as launching the application. Unless the app is coded poorly, there's no reason for it to reset just because you hit the home button and launched something else.

    That is not the case for me. Apps that are running in the background will close sometimes and they don't always go back to the same state when they re-open. I'm not exactly sure how it works, but it seems to be effected by how much memory is being used, because if I ever open Firefox, I can count on everything that's running in the background closing, because Firefox is a memory hog. Also, Firefox itself never goes back to the previous state it was in, not ever. I can always tell when the phone runs out of memory because the launcher reloads when I press the home key. Perhaps this is something that is only an issue with Samsung phones, but I can definitely tell you that has not been my experience. With WebOS I could always count on my apps staying in the exact state I left them in when switching to other apps, and would not close until I flicked them off the screen.
    Stuff that's actively being used in the background can also drop information into the notification bar. Spotify, while playing, shows song information there; Tasker shows which current profiles are active; Email displays a notification if you have new mails; Twitter shows if you have new messages or mentions.
    Yeah, I understand how that works, but with WebOS the icon would pop up briefly even if there weren't any new notifications, just to let me know that it was checking for updates in the background. I liked that. I suppose it would probably be a better feature if it were an option, either way.
    Does that make sense? Basically, you can safely assume that unless you reboot your phone, your applications should always be exactly where you left them.
    It doesn't make any sense, I really wish that were the case.
  36. Snarkasm
    Snarkasm I *have* found that browsers can be an exception to this rule, particularly with multi-tab workflows - if a browser has three tabs open in the background and it's forced to close, it will often only reopen the tab you were actively looking at, not the other two. You're saying that FF doesn't even retain its last-viewed tab, though?

    That I dunno. FF definitely is a memory hog, though.
  37. ardichoke
    ardichoke I'm pretty sure that restoring it's tabs when relaunched is something that needs to be handled by the browser developer. That would put the browser issue firmly in the "not an Android problem" column. Also, Firefox is a massive memory hog on Android (and has an insane install footprint compared to, say, Dolphin HD). One shouldn't be surprised that launching it causes background tasks to die. That's what the Android core is supposed to do, leave things in memory until that memory is needed elsewhere, then kill it.
  38. Thrax
    Thrax Any time a redraw occurs (browser, launcher, whatever), it's a memory issue. Much of the time it's because the phone's manufacturer did not properly optimize the out-of-memory (OOM) groupings for the kernel. A shockingly high number of phones don't actually allocate the correct amount of RAM to userspace applications, even when there's plenty of RAM to spare.

    Android actually uses a priority system with 5 or 6 thresholds. It'd look something like 6-18-25-75-150, with each one representing a point at which applications started to get closed or docked in NAND. For example, if the phone dips below 150MB real free RAM, it'd start closing the first batch of apps. If it goes below 75, the next group goes. In the OOM groups, I believe it's the third number that's most important for keeping user applications (like browsers) from redrawing, and many OEMs set this value way too low. On the Motorola Droid, for example, it's literally the difference between redrawing the launcher every time you hit home and never redrawing at all... ever.

    Now, there are situations where the application is actually to blame. But what I just described is incredibly common on any device with 512MB (or less) of RAM. There are community-created scripts to fix it, but they require a rooted phone.
  39. PirateNinja
    PirateNinja The response I got was about generic as possible:

    Hi Dan,

    I have connected with my colleagues and they have indicated that this is a broad agreement and provides the rights to any Microsoft patents that are infringed by HTC’s smartphones running the Android Mobile Platform.

    Best,

    ~~~~~~

    ~~~~~ | Waggener Edstrom Worldwide | 503.443.7070 | ~~~@waggeneredstrom.com | Microsoft News Center

  40. SamPD A shame for the Palm platform indeed, I still bring my Palm with me, even though I have the new Android Galaxy 2 model. I just hope Palm dies a peaceful death, because that is where they are headed.
    My salutations to my first true mobile smart phone.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!