[samab]

Got a link?

I'm really struggling to believe that the Galaxy phones aren't making a fortune for Samsung.

There were a lot of real actual sales figures available in the apple-samsung lawsuits.

Apple vs. Samsung Trial Forces Companies to Open Up the Books - Ina Fried - Mobile - AllThingsD

I didn't say that Samsung didn't make a fortune --- I said that they lumped everything together. All you hear is they made x billion dollars on android phones --- when it is actually that they made x billion dollars making CPU's, LCD screens..., which nobody else can do. RIM doesn't make CPU's, doesn't make LCD screens --- if RIM makes android phones, it would face the same fate as HTC, making zero dollars on android phones.

[masqueofhastur]

It would be more accurate to call BB10 a version 3.0 operating system, really, by any classic measure of such things. PlayBook had 1.0 and then 2.0. BB10 simply follows along in that series.

I'd say more of a 2.0, PBOS1 was more of a 0.x beta release than a proper 1.0.

[masqueofhastur]

There were a lot of real actual sales figures available in the apple-samsung lawsuits.

Apple vs. Samsung Trial Forces Companies to Open Up the Books - Ina Fried - Mobile - AllThingsD

I didn't say that Samsung didn't make a fortune --- I said that they lumped everything together. All you hear is they made x billion dollars on android phones --- when it is actually that they made x billion dollars making CPU's, LCD screens..., which nobody else can do. RIM doesn't make CPU's, doesn't make LCD screens --- if RIM makes android phones, it would face the same fate as HTC, making zero dollars on android phones.

Err, no. Samsung's definitely making money on the mobile phone division too. It helps that they have a bunch of other sources of profits, but if they were losing money on mobiles, or even just breaking even, they wouldn't be nearly as high.

[samab]

Err, no. Samsung's definitely making money on the mobile phone division too. It helps that they have a bunch of other sources of profits, but if they were losing money on mobiles, or even just breaking even, they wouldn't be nearly as high.

Samsung's mobile sales are high --- precisely because they themselves make the CPU and the LCD screen. This enables Samsung to cut a better price to the carriers and you are seeing every carrier carrying multiple Samsung models.

[Specwire]

The only danger with being 1.0 is the missed nuances. I have no doubt RIM can do a slick, big idea new UI, but it's the little things that bring big ideas down.

Windows Phone 7 is a fine example. Runs great, looks great, but lacked the little details that iOS and Android had at that point. Much of this was addressed in Windows Phone 8, but it was a whole year later.

Still, I'm excited and very open minded to what RIM has to say and offer.

[darkehawke]

It is 1.0 but that doesn't matter if it is good.

exactly this. playbook os is different to bb10.
bb10 will have flaws, its reality to assume it will. but that doesnt mean it will be bad.
it just means it may take a while before we see its true potential!

Sent from my BlackBerry 9810 using Tapatalk

[Skeevecr]

You mean like the massive profits Samsung rakes in from sales of the 'disastrous' Android OS?

Congratulations, you managed to mention just about the only company besides Google that is making any money from android handsets. Being realistic for a moment, Rim would be fighting with the likes of HTC, Sony, LG etc for the scraps left behind after Samsung rather than being up there with them.

[darkehawke]

Congratulations, you managed to mention just about the only company besides Google that is making any money from android handsets. Being realistic for a moment, Rim would be fighting with the likes of HTC, Sony, LG etc for the scraps left behind after Samsung rather than being up there with them.

actually rim would probably be behind htc as well as they have a dedicated following too. just not enough to be profitable.

Sent from my BlackBerry 9810 using Tapatalk

[Skeevecr]

actually rim would probably be behind htc as well as they have a dedicated following too. just not enough to be profitable.

My point was more about there being Samsung who is profitable in the android market and then there is everyone else than precisely listing the also-rans.

[pkcable]

It's whatEVER RIM calls it! But it's the 3rd major generation of the QNX based OS they first developed for the Playbook, and are now using for the phones. Did apple re version iOS for the iPad or iPod Touch, or do you use the same OS, modified for your device, and it's hardware? Like other's have said RIM needs to get the Q&A right, and make sure the gold OS ships fairly bug free. (NO it won't be bug free, they never are!) But it's not 1.0, it's definately 3rd gen!

[sandmanfvr]

Any OS you start new, is 1.0. Nothing wrong with that, just keep the OS updated and move forward and continue to improve and your fine.

[big bb]

It's whatEVER RIM calls it! But it's the 3rd major generation of the QNX based OS they first developed for the Playbook, and are now using for the phones. Did apple re version iOS for the iPad or iPod Touch, or do you use the same OS, modified for your device, and it's hardware? Like other's have said RIM needs to get the Q&A right, and make sure the gold OS ships fairly bug free. (NO it won't be bug free, they never are!) But it's not 1.0, it's definately 3rd gen!

Exactly RIM will probably be using the 4th generation of QNX -> QNX8.
I was going to put the link of where it talks about QNX8 on the BlackBerry developer site, but it seems that it has been removed, so here is an screenshot of it

[randall2580]

Aren't RIM bragging that their expected 100,000 apps are the most available on launch day for a "completely new operating system'? Doesn't that equate to 1.something?

[big bb]

Aren't RIM bragging that their expected 100,000 apps are the most available on launch day for a "completely new operating system'? Doesn't that equate to 1.something?

It should, and it does with some people

[xSt0rmTroop3Rx]

Don't forget QNX was started in 1982 and they are on 6.5. Also QNX runs nuclear power plants, routers and space shuttles. I personally would prefer an OS that is proven the way QNX is.


PS. Cisco IOS is also based on QNX

This started a nuclear reaction that got me all warm inside