View Poll Results: Is the PlayBook ahead of its time?
- 40. You may not vote on this poll
Is the PlayBook ahead of its time?
With all these new technologies coming across, cross platform stuff & advanced user interface.. It's obvious the PlayBook is ahead of the competition.. But no ones really giving any credit to RIM for actually upping the scale..
Its like with Apple's dominance on the market.. Everything wrong has become right..
- 02-16-12, 01:58 AM #2
The Playbook has the most advanced UI of any tablet platform, but unless you've used for at least a few days it's not that obvious why, we all know it's fast and easy to use, but after a few days, maybe a couple weeks, you become so proficient at using it, the reasoning behind the UI becomes understandably BlackBerry; efficient, effective, shortening the time it takes you to do many things than relative to other platforms.
Once many of the apps and developers migrate over, the wait for 2.0 is behind us, I'm sure along with more minor updates, and there's more PBs in the hands of yet more users, the respect will come to this new platform.
Last edited by Carbonetics; 02-16-12 at 02:10 AM.
- CrackBerry Genius
02-16-12, 02:03 AM #4
- 2,802 Posts
- 0 Post(s)
- 0 Thread(s)
Im sorry i understand this this is a blackberry fan site but lets not get carried away. I really like my Playbook but lets not act like apple got to where it is now by making terrible products because thats certainly not the case. While the Playbook is definitely a good tablet, and has its advantages, you cant blame the people that wonder about a tablet that came from RIM that still has no email capabilities or native bbm. So how exactly is that upping the scale?
Personally i believe that the Tablet OS is still too young for anyone to say its truly better than IOS or Android. Its still missing a lot but with OS2 coming and being demoed...its showing the potential to quickly catch and mayb pass these other platforms down the road.
Ahead of its time though....i think not. just my opinion though
Last edited by Rello; 02-16-12 at 02:15 AM.
- 02-16-12, 02:20 AM #5
The UI is good but its not to say that the UI Apple has is bad either. If it was really bad, then it wouldn't be the top. There is no right or wrong way when it comes to designing a UI. Some things just work better than others. But don't confuse that with good and poor because they're not the same thing.
- 02-16-12, 02:35 AM #6
This is precisely why I believe the PB and upcoming BBX/10 have the advantage, they have years of a disadvantage in market share but in that very respect you have a tremendous advantage in being able to create the architecture of something that has learned from years of mistakes form other manufacturers, and BBX/10 phones will be built upon the architecture of a tablet, not the other way around!
And trust me when I tell you the strengths of QNX won't be seen for years, putting QNX into a mobile phone is like putting the most efficient Lamborghini engine into your tricycle, power without necessarily the power usage of the competition, multi-cores is where it will shine, RIM has only scratched the surface with QNX's advantages over everything else in existence, and I sincerely mean everything!
The only real limitation of QNX is what RIM wants to do with it within a prescribed amount of power usage and how intelligently and efficiently they program the OS for use in devices.
Last edited by Carbonetics; 02-16-12 at 02:44 AM.
- 02-16-12, 02:46 AM #7
Beware, there's some serious trolling going on tonight and this thread will draw him like a fly to honey. If he hits, please ignore, he's on a roll and will hook you.
- CrackBerry Genius
02-16-12, 03:04 AM #8
- 2,138 Posts
- 0 Post(s)
- 0 Thread(s)
2) Re: "BBX/10 phones will be built upon the architecture of a tablet, not the other way around" - How does this make the OS for BB phones better? I've heard this so many times I just fail to understand what's behind this argument. Having a .nix OS that was initially optimized for tablets on a phone is better than having a .nix OS that was originally made for phones, but later optimized for tablets? But how?
3) Re: "QNX into a mobile phone is like putting the most efficient Lamborghini engine into your tricycle, power without necessarily the power usage of the competition, multi-cores is where it will shine, RIM has only scratched the surface with QNX's advantages over everything else in existence." You, guys, make QNX sound like it's an alien technology. How is it a Lamborghini engine? ROTS and multi-kernel? Can you tell me what the advantages to you, the end user, are? But, please, don't go into that electric machinery and nuclear power plants stuff. It doesn't make sense when we talk about a tablet/phone OS.
If you mean the UI is advanced compared to other platforms, then (1) I agree with you although this is entirely subject to personal preferences and (2) it shouldn't have much to do with the OS itself and can be replicated on other OSs.
I am not trolling, so, please, don't get mad at me. I am just trying to understand why people keep insisting QNX is super-duper-mega 2050 technology that happened to have been developed in the 80s and that it offers the end user something extraordinary. Your explanations will probably help me appreciate the PB more
I personally have chosen the Playbook over the competition because of the UI and hardware (screen and portability) and partially because others were too pricey for me to justify.
Last edited by kennyliu; 02-16-12 at 03:49 AM.
02-16-12, 03:17 AM #9
- 20 Posts
- 0 Post(s)
- 0 Thread(s)
there are far better tablets out there with way better operating systems than the playbook. I have learned my leason on buying a product, after going on a site that only deals with one manufacture like this one does, to get advice, as it will always be as everyone on here is, biased towards that product being the best. Why people on here can not see the short falls the playbook has, is beyond me. Simple things like auto capitals after a full stop is very old school, as is no spell correction, that with the doddgy browser, complex was of doing what on other plarforms is very straight forward, and I am not talking about apple here, as I have no interest in apple, but I have tried it and it is wqy better, but at a far higher price. My playbook is going, not even going to wait for v2.0 if it ever does arrive.
- CrackBerry Genius
02-16-12, 04:06 AM #11
- 2,802 Posts
- 0 Post(s)
- 0 Thread(s)
u make good points and i definitely agree with your first paragraph. Thing is though people around here love to act like Apple achieved the second highest profiting quarter ever by releasing terrible products...and thats not the case. No offense to the OP, but saying "everything wrong has become right" sounds very fan boi-ish.
Its perfectly fine that people believe in QNX as a platform. I do too. When OS2 comes out it will show just how much RIM can accomplish in 1 years time which i think will be a ton. Heres the thing though...even with OS2, the Playbook will just then be getting things it shouldve had since launch...things the competition have had for a years. Im not necessarily holding this against RIM though. The platform is only a year old...of coarse its going to be missing certain features early on.
I agree that RIM has barely scratched the surface with QNX. I believe they have a ton of tricks up their sleeves for BB10 devices but i have to side with kennyliu and say that at this point we cant make it seem like a lot more than what it is currently is. A lot of people make it seem like QNX is going to be able to make me breakfast one day...but until i start seeing these innovations, and how RIM can integrate it with vehicles and whatnot...then i have to simply say that it is a platform that believe will definitely put RIM on par with the competition...beyond that though im not sure. No one can say QNX or the Playbook is/are ahead of their time. its just too early to say that
- CrackBerry Genius
02-16-12, 04:12 AM #12
- 3,822 Posts
- 0 Post(s)
- 0 Thread(s)
It better want to be ahead of its time because it's still an immature product By the time it is at its time, it should have all the necessary apps (Skype,..), features (ad-hoc wifi support, NFC, PIM, ..) and completedness (Android Player).
Okay this really isn't Ipad vs. PlayBook thread again.. but anyways
1. RIM does have a tremendous advantage. Everyone learns from their own mistakes.. But to learn from your 'own' mistakes and to learn from 'everyone' are 2 very different things.. ios is for apple and by apple.. so they make a mistake.. learn and evolve.. however.. QNX is widespread.. used and developed by many.. so collectively bigger problems can be understood n solved..
2. This is actually a valid argument.. The iphone is based on the ipad concept.. With qnx being developed on priority.. the bb smartphones have taken a step back in development and are now being focused only as a gateway device to the superior functionality of a tab.. 'bridge' 'send to tab' etc. By avoiding a replica os for phone and tab.. RIM will be able to improve on individual functionality.. bb smartphone and tab are trying to be one rather than 2 products floating in the same cloud. In short, since I own a bb and a pb, im glad i have the option to use both devices simultaneously for a common function. Optimization is not only layout and design.. its also about functionality and processes which by developing a tab first can be given priority. iphone has priority over the ipad so this is the other way round.
3. QNX is top notch.. Same way as Linux and Windows. Its obvious the future is going to bring in multi-cores and high performance softwares which will put a device to its limit.. At that point in time you would definitely want to have your OS really stable. In that situation with unlimited power, the QNX system can simultaneously run each program as an individual without any handling problems. Simply it means, you can run your video camera at recording, view images, browse the web, edit a powerpoint, run a server, pause your nfs hidef game, run calendar, remote desktoping, few more applications, and then some more, and say your browser crashes in the middle of it all, the entire system wont come down to its knees. You simply close the browser process and rerun it with everything else remaining untouched and left as it is. Now you know why QNX seems alien? Even these basic functions are not known to everyone.. i think all of it can already be done on the pb pretty well!
About UI.. Even there the pb wins over.. ipad definitely have things looking more glossy but thats about it.. in real - it always takes an extra step to perform the same function on an ipad.. so that rules out functionality. Apps cannot be judged as they are third party but even then RIM has their own set of apps which are neatly done.
Sometimes you have to accept that everything new is not the best nor will the best wrapped gift be the best gift you receive.
- 02-16-12, 04:51 AM #14
kennyliu, I can barely keep my eyes open and should get an hour's rest before I go of to work, but I'll reply briefly.
QNX is no more 2050 than any other OS, It's not even 2015, OS updates are obsolete as soon as they hit the floor in certain respects, because the next guy will take something from that and release it repackaged on their platform next week. Nor is PB OS black magic like Apple folk would like you to believe their devices are, these are all just technological devices, so please do me a favor and don't over exaggerate or extend my statements.
As far as the statement about tablet to phone, well you always would rather scale down then up, RIM needs to do little to make this GUI work on BBX/10 phones, the resolution will be the same as PB on the phones.
The most important thing I can tell you is that QNX as a mobile platform is in it's infancy, much has been done in a very short timespan, and there is far far more work to be done.
When it does start to reach an APEX in development, I can only speculate that then it will be considered the premium OS by serious writers and technophiles that understand inherent differences in the OSes.
To finalize before I fall asleep at my KB, I can't ensure anyone that RIM will do the right things with QNX, but they've done a good job thus far of putting some of my fears to rest by way of creating what has to be inarguably the most efficient tablet OS I've ever used, and what makes a BB is it's ability to maximize my time, not give me apps I don't need or GUIs that make me feel like joining the peace corp and replanting and watering Brazilian rainforest tree snow spotted toad owls. I use BB because it makes me money, and in my half sleep I know somehow my PB is doing the same somehow, and when it makes me more efficient and I make a better living, and still have some time to workout thereafter I'm happy enough to jump on CB forums and speak my mind.
I dunno, can I make it an simpler that?
I'll address this better in the AM if this thread is still alive and well.
Last edited by Carbonetics; 02-16-12 at 05:36 AM.
- 02-16-12, 05:14 AM #17
I just wanted to say one more thing before I nod off or better yet pass out and impale myself on something.
It's just nice that we can have his conversation, I see how QNX for me may become the superior platform, where for others it may not because of apps, GUI, or a number of different reasons. For whatever reason you like/dislike what RIIM is doing, thank goodness they're actually doing something thats at least bringing them back to the fight.
Competition breeds better products from all competitors and will only benefit everyone in the long run.
Each one of us needs something different, some of us are Ferrari fans other Porsche, Lamborghini, others would just rather stare at a 63 VW Beetle, for whatever choice we have an argument for why ours is "the best".
If you're a BB fan, you can relish in the fact that good things are coming, some are already here, but much much more is coming. Smile cause even if you're die hard Appletonian, you will even benefit from BlackBerry's imminent successes.
- CrackBerry User
02-16-12, 05:34 AM #18
- 22 Posts
- 0 Post(s)
- 0 Thread(s)
YET ANOTHER comment about BlackBery Vs Apple!
Get over it!
People like different things, i like BlackBerry my mates like Apple!
It doesnt make me want to convince them that BlackBerry better becuase of x,y and z!
whats to say that Apple wont bring out the iPad 3 and we all love it so much that we move on.....
- 02-16-12, 05:47 AM #20
- 02-16-12, 07:38 AM #21
Perhaps it is ahead of its time, but this does not always matter.
Sometimes, it is just what is popular at the time. Takes me back to school where the "popular" people were so because they told you they were (marketing). Nothing wrong with the other devices, but, once a product gets a poor reputation (deserved, or not) it has a problem recovering. RIM has some work to do.
well i just wanted to know if being ahead of time is the reason for failure.. i know thats the case with sony.. happened with their tvs.. then with ps3.. and now with their tab..
i think taking from apple, rim should start providing some of the basic stuff coz not everyone wants to loathe in the potential of a device.. you know make applications which help users resolve their stupid mistakes.. or nicely said.. help users do the task..
personally i think rim should go all out and get the big gun apps all out.. getting a version of qnx car system would be great.. stuff like that..
the only reason im concerned is with all this apple herd mentality going on and people believing in junk talks.. its affected the entire flash market.. since flash was dejected so badly by jobs.. ppl have not bothered to understand its potential.. mainly web apps etc.. im sure html5 is in heavy development.. but dont see it taking ovrr flash anytime soon..
- 02-16-12, 09:33 AM #24
I like kennyliu's comment about "alien technology". It's surprisingly suitable actually.
The main thing that instantly attracted me to the PlayBook, back in November 2010 when all we had was the October announcement with Mike Lazaridis possessively grasping a prototype onstage, was the mere fact (which I hadn't known before then) that RIM had bought QNX.
As Carbonetics says, there's no black magic here (or in Apple products), just technological prowess. QNX has it, but we're seeing very very little of that in the PlayBook so far. It's the untapped potential which some of us are waiting for... truly an "iceberg" situation, where what's directly visible to us up at the user interface level is only a small part of what is there. In many cases isn't even used in the platform yet!
A simple example would be the Qnet stuff, the architecture which allows device drivers to be run remotely. It's not really possible to do this with another OS (at least, none that are in widespread use). If they wanted to, they could without breaking a sweat set things up so that we could pair two PlayBooks together, with one of them getting a direct feed of various sensor data (e.g. accelerometer, magnetometer) from the other, at the device driver level.
In another platform you could implement something distantly resembling this, but it would be hacked in at a higher level, wouldn't work as reliably, and would require new APIs (and thus nothing would be compatible with it) if done the OS level, and it would be slower and far less easy for developers to work with.
This capability has been seen or mentioned in the PlayBook so far only in the CES demo video with the Porsche QNX concept car, where they talk about how the "head unit" PlayBook in the centre console could control the others on the rear of the headrests, even arranging to pipe audio from one of them to the other. (They weren't talking about just "streaming" an MP3 between two devices either.)
It's almost mind-boggling to someone who works with typical OSes to picture making this work, and yet it's basically baked into QNX already. To users, it will just work and they may not even notice it as special.
If RIM succeeds with this platform, one reason may be that QNX will reset the public's expectations and, when they look at other platforms, they'll be frankly puzzled why not every device can do such things so easily, reliably, and invisibly.
- 02-16-12, 09:52 AM #25
As someone here already alluded too; sometimes the better system doesn't always come out on top.
I did some Video DJing back in the early 80's while the short-lived Beta/VHS war was still on. Betamax was what the clubs used. It was far superior to VHS in form and function but never took off in the consumer market. Likely the cost factor - I don't recall exactly. That part of the 80's is a bit of a blur to me
I realize, that at the time, these where both new tech with no real background to follow up from and improve upon. This thread simply reminded me of it and to this day, if I think about it, it's a shame that VHS won.
I don't think the PB is ahead of it's time. I don't think it offers us much more, at the moment, than other tabs do. I think the UI is (currently) an improvement from anything else on the market which in itself is an amazing accomplishment when put up against the top dog that has been building on their UI for 5+ years.
Last edited by pmccartney; 02-16-12 at 09:56 AM. Reason: changed 'much more, at the moment, than'