OK, maybe I did a lousy job storytelling, because one of my main points was that there were 3 different companies -- Palm, PalmSource, and Access -- all gumming up the works.
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 9:40 PM, John Messeder <[email protected]> wrote: > Cuz doesn't matter whether it's the engineers or the suits, in the end, > to us mere users, it was Palm. > > On 3/6/2010 9:21 PM, Craig Froehle wrote: >> >> >> How is this like your story? >> >> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:31 PM, John Messeder <[email protected] >> <mailto:jmesseder%40comcast.net>> wrote: >> > Thing is, to those of us less plugged in or paying less attention, it's >> > like a fellow told a credit window associate at Sears a bunch of >> years back. >> > She said she was sorry for the inconvenience, but she was not >> > responsible for setting the policy, and he said, >> > Then please find me someone who is responsible because right now >> > you *are* Sears & Roebuck, and I'm an unhappy customer. >> > >> > On 3/6/2010 8:21 PM, Craig Froehle wrote: >> >> >> >> Palm was VERY active in trying to replace Palm OS. But, senior >> >> management got in the way of the engineers through a series of >> >> corporate upheavals, including spinning off PalmSource, licensing Palm >> >> OS, and merging PalmSource with ACCESS (an Asian company). Through >> >> all that, the engineers at both Palm & PalmSource were quite busy >> >> trying to gin up a new OS based on Linux. However, the marketing and >> >> corporate elements of the companies were more focused on other things, >> >> so the constant undulation in the company frustrated the technical >> >> efforts. >> >> >> >> That's what I've gotten 2nd- and 3rd-hand, but if there are any former >> >> (or current) Palm employees on here who want to elaborate, please, be >> >> my guest. >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------------ >> > >> > Yahoo! Groups Links >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> > > > ------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
