Last week news broke that Apple Inc is the most successful, most valuable company in U.S. history. For over a decade, everything Steve Jobs touched turned into gold, and Apple fanboys forked out hundreds of millions of dollars annually on products designed by hipsters, for hipsters.

Naturally, everyone wanted in on the money. For example, Apple is currently in court with Samsung, arguing that it holds the patent on the technology used in Samsung’s Galaxy 4 S products.

Everyone wants to see Apple-grade success, and maintain it. Hewlett Packard is no different. Unfortunately, unlike the great big Mac Machine, HP has had no clear vision, no long-term plan, and no leadership.

Currently on their third CEO in less than as many years, and struggling within the consumer PC market, they are desperately hoping to turn things around by going mobile and trying again with the tablet market – despite their spectacular failure with the TouchPad.

Their new Mobility division will be headed by former Nokia MeeGo guy Alberto Torres, who wants the division to tackle consumer tablets and the like.

According to an internal memo from HP, “Alberto’s first order of business will be to accelerate our tablet strategy and begin to execute products against our consumer/SMB target. The exact structure of his team will follow that strategy.”

The real question is whether or not HP – with its lack of coherent leadership or game plan – has waited too late to jump on this bandwagon. Though Meg Whitman, former CEO of eBay, is doing her utmost to guide this ship, waiting so long to get into the tablet market already saturated with three incarnations of the iPad might mean HP goes the way of Blackberry and its Playbook.

Not to completely discount HP, of course. Though their recent postings were dismal, tech analysts with Sterne Agree  are optimistic that Whitman will make the needed difference in the company.

“We think HP has the ingredients,” [Sterne Agree analyst Shaw] Wu said. “Also, Cisco is another name that we also use that in reference to. We think these companies have the ingredients necessary for a turnaround. Now there are other companies like RIMM and Nokia that don’t have quite those things so we think there’s a big distinction.”

Instead, RIM and Nokia “face much more dire futures,” Wu said.