[aawilson]

They posted the full 40 minute interview of Mike in San Francisco, includes a Playbook demo, a look at the future of Rim, and question and answers session.

RIM CEO Mike Lazaridis at D: Dive Into Mobile | All Things Video | AllThingsD

[gregorylkelly]

I think you mean "Question and avoiding answers session"

[aawilson]

Oh yes of course. Thanks for the correction!

[WillieLee]

I think it's great that the "technical jargon" that their blogger and Walt didn't know was Common Criteria EAL certification. That's not exactly an unknown standard. Especially for people that have written about security in the computing world.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[cheechorama]

Oh my gosh this interview was a joke. This took my confidence in RIM from zero to negative 100

[eth555]

Wow! He has his head buried in the sand big time. He would not even acknowledge there was any competition to BlackBerry at all! Does he not realize that Apple and Android will have dual core tablets and phones out also? Wow!

[JRSCCivic98]

Well, I couldn't take it anymore and decided to just grin and bear it. Felt like I was going to strangle someone at about the 17:00 minute mark. Made a slight positive change about the 3x:00 mark or so. Bottom line, enjoy the PB for now... you won't see QNX on your BB until BFE 3rd world country gets 3G, lol.

In reality, I think RIM will probably push QNX to the BB sooner than that in the US on a very limited basis, but I don't think it'll happen until they've exhauses it on the PB and tablet market. Once that wears off, they'll introduce a BB with QNX to drum things up again. It's obvious these guys have discovered that they cannot push super new technology on the masses much like Apple and Google are doing. Where Apple and Google are producing phones that cannot yet survive on all these other limited global networks, RIM's decided to market their old school stuff to them instead. I can't say I blame them for it... they seem to want to be in the market of making money all over the globe and not just US/Canada/Euro. The problem is, the markets in these 3 leading areas are going to start dropping them the more they lag behind and the more other platforms advance. I also see fault in RIM not doing what the other industry players are doing and forcing the hands of these other countries to hurry up with their subpar networks if they want to play with their gear. Right now RIM's basically telling them... no problem if you have a pos network... here, enjoy our 8700, it's the shiznit!

[thymaster]

^^^
I couldn't agree more. RIM sees the entire world as their potential customer. They have different products for different markets and covering all corners of the world. From entry level Curve to high end Bold. Apple just sees one kind of customer and that's the rich first world country.

The press in North America is being a little harsh on RIM lately because they see one side of the story and that is lack of innovation. The big picture though is RIM is hitting a home run with worldwide sales especially in Latin America, Middle east, India, and Southeast Asia. With all these markets that they want to cover, it's hard to ship out one phone like the iPhone. Their shareholder have a sales quota and they got to execute these numbers without overwhelming the poor, middle and rich class worldwide.

Unless the world is on par with LTE and Wimax, CDMA, GSM, HSPA+ and EDGE doesn't exist then QNX would be the only business strategy RIM will ever need.

[dkingsf]

Well, I couldn't take it anymore and decided to just grin and bear it. Felt like I was going to strangle someone at about the 17:00 minute mark. Made a slight positive change about the 3x:00 mark or so. Bottom line, enjoy the PB for now... you won't see QNX on your BB until BFE 3rd world country gets 3G, lol.

In reality, I think RIM will probably push QNX to the BB sooner than that in the US on a very limited basis, but I don't think it'll happen until they've exhauses it on the PB and tablet market. Once that wears off, they'll introduce a BB with QNX to drum things up again. It's obvious these guys have discovered that they cannot push super new technology on the masses much like Apple and Google are doing. Where Apple and Google are producing phones that cannot yet survive on all these other limited global networks, RIM's decided to market their old school stuff to them instead. I can't say I blame them for it... they seem to want to be in the market of making money all over the globe and not just US/Canada/Euro. The problem is, the markets in these 3 leading areas are going to start dropping them the more they lag behind and the more other platforms advance. I also see fault in RIM not doing what the other industry players are doing and forcing the hands of these other countries to hurry up with their subpar networks if they want to play with their gear. Right now RIM's basically telling them... no problem if you have a pos network... here, enjoy our 8700, it's the shiznit!

Ol' Lizardlips is Steve Jobs in a different suit.

[JRSCCivic98]

Ol' Lizardlips is Steve Jobs in a different suit.

I think I would rather have a sit down discussion with Stevo then Mike. At least then my hair won't be pulled out. lol

[BBThemes]

love how people r picking up on the 2G comment, the full answer also comments on 3G, so from what im getting from his comments on the paragdim shift,

1) smartphones - 2/3g like BB is now for more `evolving` markets running os6
2) superphones - 3/4G devices running multicore qnx for the more expensive markets
3) tablets - yeh playbook, dun need to expand that answer.

also interesting was the comment right at the end, where he`s saying about OS 6.1, thats coming end Q1 2011

anyways for anyone thats on mobile heres a youtube link, it is 40mins long so will use a fair bit of data tho

[lnichols]

also interesting was the comment right at the end, where he`s saying about OS 6.1, thats coming end Q1 2011

Yeah especially since they can't even get a decent number of OS 6.0 to the market. I remember seeing a cool promo video back in May of OS 6 to a black eyed peas song, but the experience shown on that video (which I don't even think that experience exists on any Blackberry) at best was released on only one carrier in the US. **** I'd buy a Torch if it were available on Sprint, but I'm not switching to any other network just for a stop gap Blackberry.

[BBThemes]

Yeah especially since they can't even get a decent number of OS 6.0 to the market. I remember seeing a cool promo video back in May of OS 6 to a black eyed peas song, but the experience shown on that video (which I don't even think that experience exists on any Blackberry) at best was released on only one carrier in the US. **** I'd buy a Torch if it were available on Sprint, but I'm not switching to any other network just for a stop gap Blackberry.

true, but ya gotta remember alot of that is down to carriers releasing the OS, which pretty much all of them are known for being slow on that point.

as for the torch, yea i see what ya mean, however thats not a worldwide issue as the majority of carriers in the world run a gsm based system, so dont take it the wrong way but that points only really a headache for the north american market. as for the OS6 video, id say its close on .337 for the torch, but it was made id imagine by an advertising company, so its always gonna look a little flashier than real life

[JRSCCivic98]

Someone messed up on that OS6 BEP video demo. They forgot the hourglass in the middle of the screen and a bit of transition lag.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[BBThemes]

Someone messed up on that OS6 BEP video demo. They forgot the hourglass in the middle of the screen and a bit of transition lag.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

gotta disagree, i only get `transition lag` if using the trackpad, using the swipe gesture its just as fast as my mate stood next door to me using his iphone4 flicking thru pages.

[lnichols]

The fact that there were not a host of Touch based OS 6 devices at launch in the US was a real SNAFU or RIM's part. People would not be ******** as much on here if there had been something released on all carriers to cover the gap between Summer 2010, to the Playbook, to the release of QNX handsets hopefully in Q3 2011. Based on that earnings call they said the US is 34% of their business and they ignored at least 2/3 of that 34% by releasing a touch OS 6 device only on AT&T.

[taylortbb]

gotta disagree, i only get `transition lag` if using the trackpad, using the swipe gesture its just as fast as my mate stood next door to me using his iphone4 flicking thru pages.

I had a similar experience with a friend with an Android phone. He's got a high-end HTC Android phone, and we were both looking something up on our phones. He noticed me open a new tab, select a website to load, load it, and scroll around it and immediately was surprised by how smooth it was. He commented that based on the reviews and the slower processor he was expecting to see lag, but the experience was smoother than on his phone.

Early OS 6 for the Torch was pretty slow, but the newer firmwares have been great. Most days I won't see a spinning clock even once.

[JRSCCivic98]

I had a similar experience with a friend with an Android phone. He's got a high-end HTC Android phone, and we were both looking something up on our phones. He noticed me open a new tab, select a website to load, load it, and scroll around it and immediately was surprised by how smooth it was. He commented that based on the reviews and the slower processor he was expecting to see lag, but the experience was smoother than on his phone.

Early OS 6 for the Torch was pretty slow, but the newer firmwares have been great. Most days I won't see a spinning clock even once.

You shouldn't be seeing it at all. They've had 6 complete OS version revisions with thousands of builds each... how much longer before RIM can write code that doesn't get choked up on hardware they indicate is state of the art.

[taylortbb]

You shouldn't be seeing it at all. They've had 6 complete OS version revisions with thousands of builds each... how much longer before RIM can write code that doesn't get choked up on hardware they indicate is state of the art.

Every phone will lag occasionally. In a perfect world no phone would lag, ever. We don't live in a perfect world and I don't know of a single phone that doesn't lag occasionally. Those rare occasions where I manage to get a spinning clock, it's generally due to running multiple resource intensive apps at once. On any platform you get lag when you overload the processor and/or RAM. The only way for that to not be true is for the CPU to magically become more powerful as soon as it approaches 100% load with no upper limit on performance.

[JRSCCivic98]

Taylor, no offense, but RIM's out of excuses for having laggy OS builds or simple bugs in them that general users on an Internet forum can find when their own testers can't. Seriously, when we write a step by step process for them to duplicate the bug and they still can't do it until you show them yourself, something is wrong.

I'm not saying everyone at RIM is silly in the head, but some of the software developer liaisons RIM assigns to larger companies to aid in large scale OS testing outside of the carriers are how shall I put this.... either not bright or winging it.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[taylortbb]

I do know what you mean about laggy OS builds, my 9000 certainly had enough lag. My point is that in newer Torch builds the problem is pretty much solved, lag is about as common as it is on Android. iOS is different due to its lack of multitasking.

I've got plenty of criticisms of BlackBerry, especially as a developer on classic BlackBerry OS. There's a reason I have no published apps and no plans, while working on multiple projects for the PlayBook. I just don't think lag is a serious issue in their newer phones, and all in all I'm quite happy with the performance of my Torch.

[JRSCCivic98]

Every phone will lag occasionally. In a perfect world no phone would lag, ever. We don't live in a perfect world and I don't know of a single phone that doesn't lag occasionally. Those rare occasions where I manage to get a spinning clock, it's generally due to running multiple resource intensive apps at once. On any platform you get lag when you overload the processor and/or RAM. The only way for that to not be true is for the CPU to magically become more powerful as soon as it approaches 100% load with no upper limit on performance.

Actually, dual-core CPUs handle this just fine. Because they can multithread a process, the cores will never both be at 100%... they'll peg at 50% and stay there if a process is hung up... until the OS sees that and either terminates the process automatically or asks the user for input on the matter.

[taylortbb]

Actually, dual-core CPUs handle this just fine. Because they can multithread a process, the cores will never both be at 100%... they'll peg at 50% and stay there if a process is hung up... until the OS sees that and either terminates the process automatically or asks the user for input on the matter.

That is not how multi-core processors work. If I write a single threaded program which is CPU bound then it will drive 1 core to 100% until the task is complete. If I write a multi-threaded program which is CPU bound and is doing an infinitely parallelizable task then it will drive all cores to 100% until complete. Running at 100% merely indicates that the current process is CPU bound, it does not inherently indicate a malfunction.

When my multi-threaded example from above is running, other processes at the same priority will appear to lag (if it's a real-time interactive process like gaming, if it's a background process it will just take longer). Unless we want to give users manual control over process priority then this will include other apps.

[Totalimmortal363]

Funny. I just so happen to have an iPhone 4 and a Torch right here. The Torch lags, bad. Both on the newest official updates.

[mahen915]

That is not how multi-core processors work. If I write a single threaded program which is CPU bound then it will drive 1 core to 100% until the task is complete. If I write a multi-threaded program which is CPU bound and is doing an infinitely parallelizable task then it will drive all cores to 100% until complete. Running at 100% merely indicates that the current process is CPU bound, it does not inherently indicate a malfunction.

When my multi-threaded example from above is running, other processes at the same priority will appear to lag (if it's a real-time interactive process like gaming, if it's a background process it will just take longer). Unless we want to give users manual control over process priority then this will include other apps.

Thanks. I was waiting for someone to point this out. I have a feeling "dual-core" will be a HUGE topic of discussion in the coming months.