|
|
|
|
|
|
by planckscnst
5414 days ago
|
|
|
Yes! If WebOS was way better than the alternatives, it might give HP an advantage to be the only provider. However, it's not perceived as better, and the main complaint is a lack of apps. And that is because of a lack of popularity. That could be overcome if HP's hardware was much better than their competitors, but it's just not. WebOS pulls down hardware sales, and the hardware isn't doing anything to bolster WebOS. The best shot at saving WebOS is to license it. |
|
|
Unless HP was very picky about who they license too, we'll end up with another Android scenario, and a race to the bottom with hardware vendors doing as little as humanly possible to make a good experience. To them, it's just a free/cheap way of saving R&D costs.
Having said that, hardware companies already have that option in Android, so HP could take the high road and enforce strict standards for usability, compatibility, upgrades, etc. on licensees.
I still think it's a very risky gamble. HP hasn't demonstrated that they know how to create a winning end to end product with it yet. How would giving out part of that recipe (with restrictions) help anyone else be successful with it?
"the hardware isn't doing anything to bolster WebOS"
So... improve the hardware. If HP as one of the largest companies in the world (deep pockets) can't make a good piece of hardware for webOS, who else is going to be able to?
Licensing webOS will just lead to a lot of fingerpointing between HP and other vendors as people have bad experiences. "It's the hardware!" "No, it's the software!" HP owns all ends of the process. If they can't make it good, it's time to retire it (and I say this as someone who wants webOS to succeed - I just don't think licensing it out is going to save it).