HP use to have a top reputation before they got into the commodity market.
I have several HP higher end notebooks, and they work well, but they do get hot.
The problem here, in terms of notebooks and pcs, is that HP is not a manufacturuer at a low level, i.e., they do not make the CPU's, Graphic Chips, etc, and thus they are assembling componants, competing against others doing the same. Of course there is lots of technical know how, deisgn, and engineering involved, but there is a difference.
Now Apple also did not manufacture their own chips, but they did have their own OS and it use to run on motorolla chips, and it gave them a closed arena in which to hone their assmebly and design, keep prices high for a niche market, and make a larger profit.
Personally i do not like apple, and yes i have owned their laptops before. I think they are overpriced, over hyped, and the company seems to be un-ethical in their presentation.
HP does have the skill to do all of this right, but they are going to need real clear leadership and precise timing. More than the type of thinking of buying the palm brand.
1) There is a technology issue. They need to have both the power and not overheating problems. I tended to go the HP route, because as a software developer, i need the power and would not consider a laptio without it. But for the mass market, i would say less power, but also less heat is more of a winning formula.
But this might be a non-issue with the new sandy bridge platform.
2) Limit the number of products, and get each one perfect, even if it means loosing initial shelf space. Extra copper on the motherboards, slick design, advanced research into cooling solutions.
3) The display, at least on some models, has to be top notch. What would happen if HP came out with a notebook that used one of the more advance LCD scanning mechanisms, even if this high end notebook cost an extra $500. Imagine a notebook with a screen that could be calibrated - what a market that would open up, and you would get huge points for your reputation as well.
4) Drastically lower the acceptaple failure rate level. Remove problem products from the market, take a loss for a period of time for a future dominance. I think Samsung did something like this, and look where they are now.
Yeah, HP, get back to where you were.