[BennyX]

We're having this discussion because there are people here, who I have no idea why they are here, who post nothing but negativity when it concerns all things RIM......and the rest just an assorted crowd of malcontents, spoiled rotten, overly entitled, and pathologically immature, with no clue how to have an intelligent, fair, and balanced discussion.

think of us 'malcontents' as people who see the unfulfilled potential in our Playbooks.. I look at something like the Kindle Fire, that's more simplistic than the PB yet shares a common 'brain' (CPU/Video processor) and it has access to far more apps (and more importantly, games that actually push the hardware), despite the fact that PB can supposedly run Android apps (the same apps/games that run on the Kindle Fire) I see that the PB falls short of its potential. The Kindle Fire, simply, put, with the same hardware (where it counts) has access to far more apps and games that showcase its power than the Playbook does.

Where are the programs that push the Playbook? Simply put, there are none. Take Shadowgun or Grand Theft Auto 3, both running on Android. Nice games. it'd be nice to run them on the PB, it would push the hardware a bit. But no... not possible. No dice, despite the PB supposedly having Android compatibility. It's only due to RIM's own restrictions that I can't run certain Android apps/games. It's not a limitation of the hardware.

This is the kind of thing that's going to kill the Playbook. They tempt people with the promise of running Android apps/games, yet they can only run the weakest selection. Look RIM, there are 2 main choices, as in every market.. here it's IOS and Android. There's no room for a 3rd player. QNX is nice, and it should probably fall on RIM to make the killer apps for it, but until then, Android compatibility is all you have, and when you make that difficult and throw artificial limitations in the way, you're only cutting off your nose to spite your face.

[kbz1960]

think of us 'malcontents' as people who see the unfulfilled potential in our Playbooks.. I look at something like the Kindle Fire, that's more simplistic than the PB yet shares a common 'brain' (CPU/Video processor) and it has access to far more apps (and more importantly, games that actually push the hardware), despite the fact that PB can supposedly run Android apps (the same apps/games that run on the Kindle Fire) I see that the PB falls short of its potential. The Kindle Fire, simply, put, with the same hardware (where it counts) has access to far more apps and games that showcase its power than the Playbook does.

Where are the programs that push the Playbook? Simply put, there are none. Take Shadowgun or Grand Theft Auto 3, both running on Android. Nice games. it'd be nice to run them on the PB, it would push the hardware a bit. But no... not possible. No dice, despite the PB supposedly having Android compatibility. It's only due to RIM's own restrictions that I can't run certain Android apps/games. It's not a limitation of the hardware.

This is the kind of thing that's going to kill the Playbook. They tempt people with the promise of running Android apps/games, yet they can only run the weakest selection. Look RIM, there are 2 main choices, as in every market.. here it's IOS and Android. There's no room for a 3rd player. QNX is nice, and it should probably fall on RIM to make the killer apps for it, but until then, Android compatibility is all you have, and when you make that difficult and throw artificial limitations in the way, you're only cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Thumbs down.

[alnamvet68]

think of us 'malcontents' as people who see the unfulfilled potential in our Playbooks.. I look at something like the Kindle Fire, that's more simplistic than the PB yet shares a common 'brain' (CPU/Video processor) and it has access to far more apps (and more importantly, games that actually push the hardware), despite the fact that PB can supposedly run Android apps (the same apps/games that run on the Kindle Fire) I see that the PB falls short of its potential. The Kindle Fire, simply, put, with the same hardware (where it counts) has access to far more apps and games that showcase its power than the Playbook does.

Where are the programs that push the Playbook? Simply put, there are none. Take Shadowgun or Grand Theft Auto 3, both running on Android. Nice games. it'd be nice to run them on the PB, it would push the hardware a bit. But no... not possible. No dice, despite the PB supposedly having Android compatibility. It's only due to RIM's own restrictions that I can't run certain Android apps/games. It's not a limitation of the hardware.

This is the kind of thing that's going to kill the Playbook. They tempt people with the promise of running Android apps/games, yet they can only run the weakest selection. Look RIM, there are 2 main choices, as in every market.. here it's IOS and Android. There's no room for a 3rd player. QNX is nice, and it should probably fall on RIM to make the killer apps for it, but until then, Android compatibility is all you have, and when you make that difficult and throw artificial limitations in the way, you're only cutting off your nose to spite your face.

While your arguement(s) on their surface have the ring of attractiveness and truth to them, they are deceptive at best, and patently false at worst. iOS is a smartphone app, dumbed down for the masses, installed on a big screen, and wonderful when it comes to graphic intensive entertainment; good luck trying to check your e-mail or do a quick web search while the cars are screeching and crashing in grand theft whatever in the background. iOS, a serious professional and secure OS....I think not. 'rrhoid OS, well, what can I say...a minor step up from other game playing OS' found on the Commodore 64, Playstation, and x-boxes; it ('rrhoids) wants you to believe its entertainment eco-system is second to none (probably is), but in no way is it an OS that can provide the security and professional pc experience that only QNX provides.

Nice try Ace, but your specious arguements are, well, just that...specious. Nice try though.

[xKrNMBoYx]

I don't know why we bother comparing the Kindle Fire (or the Nook Color, for that matter) with the PlayBook. The Kindle Fire is a very nice EReader with some extras. The PlayBook is a full out tablet PC.

Not a "Tablet PC" if it cant run full PC OS and Programs

[omniusovermind]

Sorry Benny, I can't even remotely agree with any argument which suggests turfing QNX. I'd rather have a better engine than a better option package on my car.

Sent from my Atrix using Tapatalk

[conix67]

While your arguement(s) on their surface have the ring of attractiveness and truth to them, they are deceptive at best, and patently false at worst. iOS is a smartphone app, dumbed down for the masses, installed on a big screen, and wonderful when it comes to graphic intensive entertainment; good luck trying to check your e-mail or do a quick web search while the cars are screeching and crashing in grand theft whatever in the background. iOS, a serious professional and secure OS....I think not. 'rrhoid OS, well, what can I say...a minor step up from other game playing OS' found on the Commodore 64, Playstation, and x-boxes; it ('rrhoids) wants you to believe its entertainment eco-system is second to none (probably is), but in no way is it an OS that can provide the security and professional pc experience that only QNX provides.

Nice try Ace, but your specious arguements are, well, just that...specious. Nice try though.

You have absolutely no idea about OSes. Deceptive is what I'd call the messages you're sending out.

All 3 OSes, QNX (is the name of OS), Android (runs on Linux), iOS (runs on BSD Unix) are inherently secure and professional level OSes. Android gets picked on performance often, since it runs on a virtual machine, which is an advantage for RIM since anyone can just write the virtual machine to whichever platform and allow it to run Android apps.

Commodore 64 doesn't even have what's considered OS. Playstation 3 and Xbox both have OSes just as good as any PC systems out there.

iOS is a smartphone app?

The bottom line is all three are fully capable OSes, they all support preemptive multitasking in its heart at OS level.

There are certain design elements on PB that stands out, like bezel action, but you can consider that also a problem when putting it on a phone, since most likely it won't have bezels on the sides.

[conix67]

Sorry Benny, I can't even remotely agree with any argument which suggests turfing QNX. I'd rather have a better engine than a better option package on my car.

Sent from my Atrix using Tapatalk

Well, RIM knows exactly that. Third player will have very little chance of survival. It shows in developer interest.

There are many many apps on App World. No offence to developers but it seems there are a lot of hobbyist out there. There are many of them developing for Android or iOS too, but I find apps on Android and iOS generally better and cheaper. Many free apps are either Ad supported or built to promote their own business, and they are professionally done.

I see good apps on App World, but many are not as polished as what you see on other app stores.

RIM tells the world App World is healthy (including BB) and brings more revenue to developers than Android. I guess that is the important factor RIM is showing off, which is the right way to prove themselves. However, they do need to get more high profile developers onto PB platform (actually the fact that they are split into two OSes not compatible to each other, BB7 and QNX of PB, doesn't help either).

So availability of quality apps is what drives interest from consumers. It is pretty much guaranteed today if there's an app for tablet, it would be available on iOS.

With introduction of OS 2.0, they need to close the gap. Closing the gap isn't enough to overtake anyone, since they are still trailing. When Android tablet market is still showing weakness, you can penetrate into it and take it over. It can cost a lot of money, as this will require selling hardware at lower price until the market share increases to reasonable level, but there's simply no other way at this point.

[kennyliu]

You have absolutely no idea about OSes. Deceptive is what I'd call the messages you're sending out.

All 3 OSes, QNX (is the name of OS), Android (runs on Linux), iOS (runs on BSD Unix) are inherently secure and professional level OSes. Android gets picked on performance often, since it runs on a virtual machine, which is an advantage for RIM since anyone can just write the virtual machine to whichever platform and allow it to run Android apps.

Commodore 64 doesn't even have what's considered OS. Playstation 3 and Xbox both have OSes just as good as any PC systems out there.

iOS is a smartphone app?

The bottom line is all three are fully capable OSes, they all support preemptive multitasking in its heart at OS level.

There are certain design elements on PB that stands out, like bezel action, but you can consider that also a problem when putting it on a phone, since most likely it won't have bezels on the sides.

I was thinking exactly the same. Some of our forum frequenters keep saying QNX is unlike the other crap.

But what they are referring to is the UI (e.g. bezel swipe control and animated windows), which can as effectively be implemented ON TOP of iOS, Android, Bada, or other OS.

The same guys would say that iOS and Android are "phone OSs" and, therefore, they are somehow crippled compared to QNX, which happens to run cars, electric power plants, machinery, etc. and therefore it's superior.

Are you, guys, serious? An OS that is designed for a phone and later optimized to run on a tablet is somehow a crippled tablet OS, but the OS that runs light switches and cars is superior as a tablet OS? How so?

I know the rebuttal will be about the multi-kernel architecture and the real-time operation, which makes QNX robust and stable. I won't argue with that, but at the end-user level, QNX is as stable as any other major OS. I probably have as many force closes on my Android phone as app crashes (notably the browser) on my Playbook. I have yet to encounter a single problem on my Windows 7 computer and we know that Windows is single-kernel and not real time. In other words, the properties of QNX that are often mentioned on this site are of irrelevance to most people most of the time.

In other words, I like my Playbook not because the OS (backend/core or whatever it's called) is "industrial", muti-kernel, RTOS, and other OSs are "just phone OSs", but because the UI is well-thought out and intuitive. Of course, that's IMO.

[swyost]

There is no comparison; one is a pc in tablet form, the other is a entertainment device with an added benefit of being an e-reader. Of course, one has to be literate to use the Kindle's e-reader function, and I have some doubts as to the level of literacy of some of these owners since had they read the full specs of both devices, they would have bought a PlayBook for less money then the overpriced Kindle.

I am sorry but if anyone thinks the Playbook is a tablet PC, I would like to know what they are smoking. Almost all tablets are extensions of a PC, not a replacement for one. The Playbook is no exception and given its hamstrung app capabilities and lack of native email, it is more of a poster child than most for why tablets are not PCs. I like my Playbook but the old Acer netbook sitting in my office offers more basic functionality....

[swyost]

Quite simply, the Fire was the first $200 "tablet" to be highly advertised. The current PB at around the same price range is not being highly advertised by RIM. I've yet to see much of any advertising on TV, newspaper, or internet for the Playbook by RIM. The only reason I heard about the PB at all was a local boxing week sale flyer, and that had nothing to do with RIM placing that ad, and more to do with me aggressively looking for tablet sales.

If the PB in its current form today were to be introduced to the public awareness at the same time as the Fire, the Fire wouldn't be outselling it nearly as much because the Playbook has more powerful hardware and OS, while the Fire has more apps (for a short while). If you were to fast forward to OS2, The Fire would be falling behind the PB in every possible way.

-half of PB's RAM
-a phone version of Android... on a tablet
-only 8 GB non expandable memory
-smaller battery
-no cameras
-no full access to Google android market (browse only, no installing)
-no HDMI out

pretty clear cut. I don't even know why we're having this discussion at all.

There is a discussion here because it appears the RIM fan community cannot accept the fact that the Playbook is not a successful product in the mass market. What is the real difference between the Playbook, Nook, and Kindle Fire? Those products have sold more since November than RIM has sold Playbooks in a year; including those sold in the near fire sale RIM prices of the past couple months. Here is an essential question: as a business person would you rather have the revenue of a football stadium full of moderately satisfied customers, or a room full of very satisfied customers? Keep in mind that the Playbook doesn't even make the list for the surveys being done because its market share is small enough to fall under other tablets.

I know people with other devices and even visit their online forums at times. They are never talking about the Playbook in good or bad terms. Why do people here insist on dragging other products into these forums? I did it myself with some comments about a transformer prime, but will not make that mistake again. RIM's products have fallen over the past few years from being the status products, to being those whose owners appear to have inferiority complexes. I bought a Playbook as a tool, not as a measure of my self worth....

[swyost]

I don't know why we bother comparing the Kindle Fire (or the Nook Color, for that matter) with the PlayBook. The Kindle Fire is a very nice EReader with some extras. The PlayBook is a full out tablet PC.

You would appear to have pretty low standards for what you consider a PC if you think the Playbook is a "full out" tablet PC. The only generally accessible tablet PCs at the moment run Windows 7 since they do not need to be tethered to another machine to provide some level of essential functionality. Actually, the Transformer series might also count to some degree, and the Toshiba Thrive has so many ports it does at least offer some additional levels of functionality.

Until OS 2, the Playbook doesn't even have native e-mail capabilities without tethering it to a BB phone and that is only scratching the surface of missing functionality. I don't know anyone other than Asus and the companies selling Windows tablets that even market their tablets as a PC. That includes RIM....

[omniusovermind]

There is a discussion here because it appears the RIM fan community cannot accept the fact that the Playbook is not a successful product in the mass market. What is the real difference between the Playbook, Nook, and Kindle Fire? Those products have sold more since November than RIM has sold Playbooks in a year; including those sold in the near fire sale RIM prices of the past couple months. Here is an essential question: as a business person would you rather have the revenue of a football stadium full of moderately satisfied customers, or a room full of very satisfied customers? Keep in mind that the Playbook doesn't even make the list for the surveys being done because its market share is small enough to fall under other tablets.

I know people with other devices and even visit their online forums at times. They are never talking about the Playbook in good or bad terms. Why do people here insist on dragging other products into these forums? I did it myself with some comments about a transformer prime, but will not make that mistake again. RIM's products have fallen over the past few years from being the status products, to being those whose owners appear to have inferiority complexes. I bought a Playbook as a tool, not as a measure of my self worth....

I can't speak for others but personally I find not all, but the majority of complaints about the PB to be stupid and frivolous. Some have solid merit. ie. lack of predictive keyboard. But the rest... I personally think anyone who is going to use a native calender as the foundation stone of their argument for the success or failure of an entire set of tablet features to choose from is a dimwit. netflix and skype? Harping on 2 apps? That's a case for the entire tablet? No it isn't. I don't buy the different strokes for different folks argument here. Making a case for whether a tablet is a success or not based on a 2-star movie streamer and a video chat app only shows me that there's a good reason why most commercials are deliberately geared towards the most basic, simplest levels of human intelligence.

You know who has the most to gain from native email? A business person. You know who complains about not having it the most? Well you would think it would be the same answer. However...

You know what makes big sales and waves in the consumer market? Products that are attractive to a grown adult who ate captain crunch for breakfast while watching dora he explorer, got dressed and went to walmart to shop for generic lower priced, lower quality brands, had lunch at McDonalds, went home and told everyone on facebook that the color yellow makes them sad.

Yeah I sound like I think I'm better than the herd of iphone-walmart-mcdonalds humanity out there. But I assure you I am NOT sorry if that doesn't make me the advertising demograph that makes those big sellers such a success. Certain other products outsell playbooks because they have mass appeal. I don't view what appeals to the common masses as equating to being a better quality product. perhaps many of you do, in which case I wish you and Cap't Crunch a bon apetit

[kennyliu]

I can't speak for others but personally I find not all, but the majority of complaints about the PB to be stupid and frivolous. Some have solid merit. ie. lack of predictive keyboard. But the rest... I personally think anyone who is going to use a native calender as the foundation stone of their argument for the success or failure of an entire set of tablet features to choose from is a dimwit. netflix and skype? Harping on 2 apps? That's a case for the entire tablet? No it isn't. I don't buy the different strokes for different folks argument here. Making a case for whether a tablet is a success or not based on a 2-star movie streamer and a video chat app only shows me that there's a good reason why most commercials are deliberately geared towards the most basic, simplest levels of human intelligence.

Exactly. Some people on this forum will say "Who cares about the two-star movie streaming app and a crappy video chat app? Those are for simple minded people" But at the same time will say "Awesome, we have Cut the Ropes on the Playbook"

All I want to say is that people here like trashing other tablets (this thread and many other threads on the first two pages of the forum are an example) and repeating that the Playbook is for the sophisticated, the chosen, the intelligent. It is "professional", the only tablet PC, yada yada, yada. But when asked, they can't give a definitive and coherent answer as to why the Playbook is "professional" and why the other stuff is "deliberately geared towards the most basic, simplest levels of human intelligence."

[omniusovermind]

Exactly. Some people on this forum will say "Who cares about the two-star movie streaming app and a crappy video chat app? Those are for simple minded people" But at the same time will say "Awesome, we have Cut the Ropes on the Playbook"

All I want to say is that people here like trashing other tablets (this thread and many other threads on the first two pages of the forum are an example) and repeating that the Playbook is for the sophisticated, the chosen, the intelligent. It is "professional", the only tablet PC, yada yada, yada. But when asked, they can't give a definitive and coherent answer as to why the Playbook is "professional" and why the other stuff is "deliberately geared towards the most basic, simplest levels of human intelligence."

Not quite a Machiavelli in your subtlety there ken
But fair enough point. Although I make no claims to owning a PB the metric by which one's own intelligence should be measured, you made that leap on your own. I also stated "commercials". Not "other stuff". I'm aware that misquoting is considered a viable tactic under the 48 laws of power, but I've always felt it's not one of the better ones due to how easily it can be recognized for what it is, and then countered.

[kennyliu]

Not quite a Machiavelli in your subtlety there ken
But fair enough point. Although I make no claims to owning a PB the metric by which one's own intelligence should be measured, you made that leap on your own. I also stated "commercials". Not "other stuff". I'm aware that misquoting is considered a viable tactic under the 48 laws of power, but I've always felt it's not one of the better ones due to how easily it can be recognized for what it is, and then countered.

Sorry to misquote you but the way I understood the flow of logic in your message was:

It is disconcerting for us, the intelligent ones, to see that only the folks that are driven by "commercials [that] are deliberately geared towards the most basic, simplest levels of human intelligence" would consider the lack of "a 2-star movie streamer and a video chat app" to be the metric for product success compared to the "other stuff" that happens to have the aforementioned apps.

Apologies if this is not what you meant.

[kdeckels]

I bought 2 Fire's for my college age daughters for Christmas. My youngest at K-State Carries hers to class instead of her much bigger/heavier laptop. In visiting with her yesterday, she hasn't had a chance to use it as an "reader", but it connects to the campus wifi & while in class she views the powerpoint while still being able to take notes; she has quickoffice on it, so she can view/edit study guides, & manages her calendar. For her, she has a 28" flat screen to watch Netflix, so in many cases the Fire has become her laptop replacement. She is not a techy, & doesn't want to be, the Fire is simple for her to use, & serves her well.

The other daughter just finished dental hygienist school & is working. She also get good use of the Fire, but it's mainly reading ebooks & streaming video's.

In my rural area, I am only aware of iPads & Fire's as what the majority own. I seen the Playbook & really liked everything about the unit, but ended up purchasing the Lenovo k1 @ $270. While I like it, I think there's things I will like better about the Playbook, one being portability, another quality of hardware. It's sitting beside me unboxed right now (since once I open it I can't return it). Professionally, or recreationally, the Playbook would better serve my needs than the fire, but there are many people that the fire is a great device.

[Vindicators]

good luck trying to check your e-mail or do a quick web search while the cars are screeching and crashing in grand theft whatever in the background.

seriously??? that's what a professional looking for?

iOS is a smartphone app, dumbed down for the masses, installed on a big screen

Current generation tablet OS (include the playbook OS) is not designed for multiple-windows paradigm. Simultaneously running apps or background service apps, its design decision and each have its own advantage/disadvantage.

About homescreen UI/UX, iOS is a smartphone OS as much as Android or PlaybookOS are. The only real difference is that ICS and PlaybookOS utilize more status bar's function for notification/setting than it smartphone counterpart.

After all, every computing platform/device depend on software/application to function, especially in current tablet form.

[lebob23]

Actually none of these tablets are for gaming. If you would ask me, a playbook is for business type people or a fire for people who consume media. The Nook tablet is the best of both worlds or it would be if BN could get its act together and save itself from bankruptcy, the fact remains everything is crap build your own desktop pc from parts on newegg and you will be happy.

[VerryBestr]

Where are the programs that push the Playbook? Simply put, there are none. Take Shadowgun or Grand Theft Auto 3, both running on Android. Nice games. it'd be nice to run them on the PB, it would push the hardware a bit. But no... not possible. No dice, despite the PB supposedly having Android compatibility. It's only due to RIM's own restrictions that I can't run certain Android apps/games. It's not a limitation of the hardware. ... until then, Android compatibility is all you have, and when you make that difficult and throw artificial limitations in the way, you're only cutting off your nose to spite your face.

While RIM does place some "artificial limitations" on Android apps, I think these complaints are due to a basic misunderstanding.

Most Android apps are written in the Java language. On Android devices, these Java apps run on the "Dalvik" virtual machine and use an extended/modified set of Java libraries. While the virtual machine approach has advantages (e.g. portability), it also has costs. In particular, this approach is not very appropriate for games that push the hardware. Such games are most often written in C or C++. Android apps which use C or C++ must use the NDK rather than the SDK -- See:
| What is the NDK? | Android Developers

RIM has implemented only the Dalvik virtual machine and its associated libraries (or at least, most of the associated libraries). Going further to support NDK-based Android apps would have been a huge task and could have introduced messy hardware dependencies. RIM would have had to simulate much more of the underlying Linux operating system. The compiled native code is not even the same for all Android phones, but depends on which processor is targeted.

Most of the high-profile demanding games are developed over a game engine, which is designed to be portable over different operating systems. The way to get these games on the PlayBook is to port the underlying game engine. Here is more info about game engines:
| Game engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| List of game engines - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

RIM has been working on getting some of the major game engines ported to the PlayBook. Expect that most demanding games will arrive on the PlayBook as native apps via these efforts, not as compatible Android apps.

To put it simply, most Android apps which "push the hardware" will contain native C or C++ code (in the app itself or an underlying game engine), and RIM did not even begin to develop support for such Android apps. This is not an artificial limitation by RIM, but an integral part of RIM's design for Android apps. RIM clearly announced that its Android compatibility would be limited to Android apps which use only Java and the Dalvik virtual machine.

Yes, there are some arbitrary limitations to RIM's Android compatibilty: the Android app store, for example (for obvious commercial reasons), and probably some features of Android's Java libraries that RIM just didn't yet get around to.