[GTiLeo]

so this is my first thread on crackberry (YAY) and its all about the real plague Blackberry has faced, THE MEDIA.

BB10 looks like such an impressive platform and the QNX on the playbook is so smooth and has so much potencial, and it always had but the media smashed it down fixating on small holes missing in it. no doubt these holes were a killer but the word was put out there that the Playbook was no good, or poo.

the current trends that i have been reading are making RIM and the release of BB10 go more towards how the playbook was and a reason to be nervous about how this new platform will do.

its really a shame how ignorant the world has become when we let the media control how we live our lives, what we choose to buy and what we choose to believe in.

[simu31]

Well technically, the Playbook is a device. It is a device which ran a first version of a brand new (to a mobile platform) OS, and then a second version of this same OS, it will soon get an upgrade to yet another improved version of the QNX based OS, and it will eventually run BB10.

What a lot of (supposed) tech writers like to think - I'm guessing from either never being in the development side of things, or through selective amnesia - is that an OS is ready as soon as it is launched. This is just not true. No company has ever launched a new OS and it be perfect straight away.

Apart from a couple of exceptions (BGR during Thorsten's keynote and an (corrrected) article from the New York Times), I haven't read that much "bad" press as yet about the new platform... and frankly, I don't believe I will - unless BB10 is a complete failure by this time next year.

I have huge hope for the new BB10 platform and from what I've seen and read so far, I continue to have faith that BB10 will be RIM's greatest achievement to date... but I'm also a Blackberry fan, and a realist, so a certain amount of positive thinking has to be going through my mind.

Si.

[peter9477]

Pretty sure that " device" in the original post was because he used a word the CrackBerry filters didn't like, and they simply remove it. Given the confused wording in one or two other sentences it seemed there may be a few more like that.

OP: you can edit your post and just use inoffensive words that the filter would accept, and still make your point, if you like...

[SixStringMadness]

The way I see it, Apple has always been a media friendly platform.

If I made a living with graphics design, video/music editing, it would be on Mac. That's what many of those folks see regularly. They think that those are the only intense computing processes to be done out there, and because they're being performed on Apple products, then Apple just has to know something that the rest of the computing world doesn't.

I work in security, and I design highly complex, integrated systems for video, access, intrusion and integrated solutions. IP Video systems in excess of 1000 cameras, and they are all on Windows or Linux boxes. 10Gbps networks require some massive computing power, and we're not using Macs, but the media people never see this. They see Macs all day long, and think they are doing to worlds most powerful computing with their Photoshop, Aftereffects, ProTools, so on and so forth....

It's a flawed interpretation of blurred perception, and the real problem is; that the media we are fed our information from these days, is absolutely in no way, unbiased. Journalism as a trade is a relic, cast into the days of our past, because facts are boring and they don't sell advertising.

[GTiLeo]

The way I see it, Apple has always been a media friendly platform.

If I made a living with graphics design, video/music editing, it would be on Mac. That's what many of those folks see regularly. They think that those are the only intense computing processes to be done out there, and because they're being performed on Apple products, then Apple just has to know something that the rest of the computing world doesn't.

I work in security, and I design highly complex, integrated systems for video, access, intrusion and integrated solutions. IP Video systems in excess of 1000 cameras, and they are all on Windows or Linux boxes. 10Gbps networks require some massive computing power, and we're not using Macs, but the media people never see this. They see Macs all day long, and think they are doing to worlds most powerful computing with their Photoshop, Aftereffects, ProTools, so on and so forth....

It's a flawed interpretation of blurred perception, and the real problem is; that the media we are fed our information from these days, is absolutely in no way, unbiased. Journalism as a trade is a relic, cast into the days of our past, because facts are boring and they don't sell advertising.

couldn't agree with you more, i used to use macs all the time and used to own a PC personally (still do) i've never liked the OS on the mac, i never found it that user friendly nore had i ever found it as a powerful or smooth running system. my cousin bought herself a macbook pro and frankly it wasnt' even an impressive system, given the hardware in it being more or less the same as the current PC i have ( which is 5 years old) with windows 7 mine might actually be a bit smoother.

macs have always had software geared more towards animation but thats slowly startign to change, or it had started to change before the release of apples saviour, the ipod

[apengue1]

Macs appeal to some people, but I can never justify the price. In my area university students are following the 'macbook' trend. I find it absolutely ridiculous because generally speaking, STUDENTS HAVE NO MONEY!! But the trend is to spend thousands on a Mac. *Shivers*.

Anyway, hardware wise, they look nice and are generally well built, but the internals are no where near as close to windows pc's for like a quarter of the price. I know that its not the same comparing to different operating systems, but still for that price, you really get squat in terms of 'computing power'.

As far as software, Ive never owned a mac and never plan to, so I can't really say much. But, I really see no reason to find out. On BB, there are no apps. For the Apple freaks out there who are used to having an app for everything, its the exact opposite on a Mac. There is nothing available in comparison.

Just my 2 cents here. The part that really kills me is this ridiculous trend in schools. These people must have REALLY low self esteems in my opinion. Spending thousands on not needed hardware pretty much shows something. The owner's rate is over 50% around here for university students btw

Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using CrackBerry Forums App/Tapatalk

[kbz1960]

The media and investors want to see real devices and systems. Right now it's mostly vaporware. When the phone does come out I think they might change their tune.

[EdY]

The PC also has tons of graphics and media software. One could easily argue even better than the Mac. However, Mac came out of the gates first (as a consumer PC) with typeface fonts, graphical user interface, etc. So they had an advantage in the media and "public eye" as graphical and easy to use.

The Mac is also "one PC" with a unified design under one company, Apple. PC's became fragmented with everyone making clones, so that could have made it more confusing to people. Media adopted Macs, but I also see them on movie and TV shows... So I wonder if they pay for product placement.

Blackberry has an image of being more nerdy/geeky and business and "financial". The phones get the job done, secure and productive. But are they fun? Cool? Trendy? The playbook also gets the job done, and now with more apps it is getting better. But it needs time to mature into a full platform.

Screw the media. Everyone with a playbook knows that is a diamond in a brick of coal. We are enjoying an amazingly slick and functional tablet for cheap. Shhh! Media might let the secret out!


Sent from my BlackBerry 9810 using Crackberry Tapatalk Forum app

[GTiLeo]

macs still use intel and nvidia chips in their machines, either way i hope apple as a company burns never was a fan of their pushy controlling marketing skeems, which is no surpise because steve jobbs what a control nut.


i hope with the QNX core platform that RIM is able to branch out into more then just tablets and phones

[xsacha]

Media adopted Macs, but I also see them on movie and TV shows... So I wonder if they pay for product placement.

I remember reading a statistic recently that Apple has had paid product placements in ~40% of blockbusters for the past 15 years or so and the percentage has never changed.

You must remember that Steve Jobs owned Pixar before selling to Disney and was then on board of directors. Also Jonathan Ive was a consultant for the design of movies such as Eva where they made the futuristic robot represent Apple design philosophy so that viewers associated futuristic with Apple. Their paid advertising goes beyond placements and includes using the devices (such as the Apple Newton and Macs used throughout the movie Under Siege 2 (1995) ).

[dbmalloy]

The media and investors want to see real devices and systems. Right now it's mostly vaporware. When the phone does come out I think they might change their tune.

A little bit harsh.... As both PB OS 2.0 and BB10 are basically QNX with different interfaces.... RIM is finally releasing proper develpment tools for BB10... not beta like when Playboo came out......

I would not expect them to say anything about hardware... no smartphone vendors do....

Ruins the surprise......

[apengue1]

I remember reading a statistic recently that Apple has had paid product placements in ~40% of blockbusters for the past 15 years or so and the percentage has never changed.

You must remember that Steve Jobs owned Pixar before selling to Disney and was then on board of directors. Also Jonathan Ive was a consultant for the design of movies such as Eva where they made the futuristic robot represent Apple design philosophy so that viewers associated futuristic with Apple. Their paid advertising goes beyond placements and includes using the devices (such as the Apple Newton and Macs used throughout the movie Under Siege 2 (1995) ).

I have no doubt they pay for product placement.
So many movies have the Apple 'theme' within. No company gets their advertising for free. There's a reason its always Apple products in these films, and it works. Even earlier in the day when not as many people had their products, all the advertising in movies and tv shows led a lot of people to believe that everyone was using them.

[Xopher]

I have no doubt they pay for product placement.
So many movies have the Apple 'theme' within. No company gets their advertising for free. There's a reason its always Apple products in these films, and it works. Even earlier in the day when not as many people had their products, all the advertising in movies and tv shows led a lot of people to believe that everyone was using them.

Paid product placement is everywhere. Even RIM does it. There was an episode of "House" where they followed Cutty for a day. Her BlackBerry kept going off throughout the entire episode. I wasn't watching it (my wife was) and I kept thinking I was getting messages on my Tour, even though my Tour was right beside me.

[apengue1]

Well of course everyone does it. Just.. not as much as Apple does. Apple in tech advertises on film like coka-cola does for beverages.

Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using CrackBerry Forums App/Tapatalk

[GTiLeo]

i'm convinced they use subliminal mesagign in their products and ads, reasons why it works on some and those it doesn't work on it has a negative effect, like me. i loth Apple to no end as do many others that are not effected by their propaganda :P