[ClassyBOLD]

Before you jump in and strangle me, read what I have to say.

I use my bridge every day and I think it's a great feature, but RIM wasting precious time and resources on WiFi Bridge makes no sense (IMHO). They're already 2 years behind the competition in terms of core functionality. The next logical upgrade from bluetooth bridge is not wifi bridge. RIM should be working on cloud syncing rather than wifi syncing.

Granted my phone is always near me, so I've never been without bridge, but the point is that RIM still trails behind what other tech companies have put out there and they're goals/targets are not ambitious enough. Business strategy is as much what you don't do as it is what you do.

*sigh*

[anon(2757538)]

Once BB10 hits the market...expect plenty of Cloud intergration.

Just because they are updating the current PlayBook OS with features, doesn't mean they won't be there with BB10.

[ClassyBOLD]

Once BB10 hits the market...expect plenty of Cloud intergration.

Just because they are updating the current PlayBook OS with features, doesn't mean they won't be there with BB10.

Ah ok, but putting those resources being used on things like wifi bridge could be better utilized. For instance to bring BB10 to the market sooner or to develop innovative features that could be there at BB10 launch.

As much as I love a PB update, I'd rather see BB10 succeed.

[Thunderbuck]

Ah ok, but putting those resources being used on things like wifi bridge could be better utilized. For instance to bring BB10 to the market sooner or to develop innovative features that could be there at BB10 launch.

As much as I love a PB update, I'd rather see BB10 succeed.

The release of BB10 likely has not so much to do with the development effort as it does market timing.

The argument could also be made that PB development doesn't automatically detract from BB10 development; it's just a matter of introducing features in PB 2.1 that are already complete and don't have to be held back. That's maybe an oversimplification, but not by a lot.

[howarmat]

Why the wifi bridge might not seem worth it i think for many companies it will really be nice. And i really hope that the hold up for 2.1 is not the wifi bridge. But its been almost 5 months since OS2 was release and 2.1 better have alot more than just what we see in the beta.

[igor10000]

What do you mean, useless? When utilising BB phone to get PB connected to the internet, would it not be a faster connection/data transfer over wifi rather than over bluetooth? helloooo...

[howarmat]

if you are on wifi you dont need the BB for the internet anyway. BUT you want to access the bridge PIM functions the same as Bluetooth bridge has now

[ClassyBOLD]

But its been almost 5 months since OS2 was release and 2.1 better have alot more than just what we see in the beta.

Based on prior experience, I'd would suggest that you don't hold your breath wishing for this.

[rupam95]

Why the wifi bridge might not seem worth it i think for many companies it will really be nice. And i really hope that the hold up for 2.1 is not the wifi bridge. But its been almost 5 months since OS2 was release and 2.1 better have alot more than just what we see in the beta.

More like 6 months.......but what if it doesn't come out this month?

What if it comes out late 4th quarter?

[ClassyBOLD]

The release of BB10 likely has not so much to do with the development effort as it does market timing.

It was development effort coaxed in a market timing rationale.

The argument could also be made that PB development doesn't automatically detract from BB10 development; it's just a matter of introducing features in PB 2.1 that are already complete and don't have to be held back. That's maybe an oversimplification, but not by a lot.

If the features had been complete they'd have been released by now. There's obviously work to be done on it.

[howarmat]

What if it doesn't come out this month?

What if it comes out late 4th quarter?

they have to release the playbook 4g with 2.1 atleast and i am fairly certain we will finally see that within 1.5 months. I guess if its q4 then its q4, nothing i can do about it. It will just be another item on RIM's list of why they are in the spot they are. They have no one to blame but themselves

[rupam95]

they have to release the playbook 4g with 2.1 atleast and i am fairly certain we will finally see that within 1.5 months. I guess if its q4 then its q4, nothing i can do about it. It will just be another item on RIM's list of why they are in the spot they are. They have no one to blame but themselves

Agreed.

[ClassyBOLD]

they have to release the playbook 4g with 2.1 atleast and i am fairly certain we will finally see that within 1.5 months.

IDK about this...the latest leaked info showed the 4G running 2.0.1 suggesting they were working on a older version OS to isolate the mobile stack issues. Also, the leaked roadmap showed the 4G slated for Q4, for whatever RIM's roadmaps are worth.

I guess if its q4 then its q4, nothing i can do about it. It will just be another item on RIM's list of why they are in the spot they are. They have no one to blame but themselves

Agreed. Management just doesn't (or didn't) get it. As great as they were, ML and JB really screwed up. Are the engineers not working hard enough or is there just not enough of them?

[TheScionicMan]

Without knowing the amount of resources going into wifi bridge or their longterm goals with it, it's hard to say whether they are using resources wisely, IMO. It's easy to play fantasy smartphone and trade this for that and fix all the problems, but I don't think they put everything else on hold while everyone tackled this project. Besides, with all of the trimming already going on, they must have kept this going for a reason. I'll leave it to the guys that do this for a living and have all of the details to allocate resources.

I am very much looking forward to the option of "Open on PlayBook" for video. I'm sure other uses will come up too.

[morlock_man]

Wifi bridge, due to the deep integration they're creating with it, likely has to tie back into every api, not just on the local device but on the device its been paired with.

There's quite a bit of code to rework there and implementing it later on in the development process would have caused no end of trouble. Getting it complete now is key to having it be reliable and not creating any more delays moving forwards.

As for wifi bridge being useless, thats a little extreme. For one it'll end up being an industrial workhorse. Second, it'll allow the creation of self-healing networks, capable of easily restoring connectivity should a device lose power or become unstable. Even the ability to stream movies or music stored on the microSD card in your paired phone is pretty sweet basic feature.

[ClassyBOLD]

Without knowing the amount of resources going into wifi bridge or their longterm goals with it, it's hard to say whether they are using resources wisely, IMO. It's easy to play fantasy smartphone and trade this for that and fix all the problems, but I don't think they put everything else on hold while everyone tackled this project. Besides, with all of the trimming already going on, they must have kept this going for a reason. I'll leave it to the guys that do this for a living and have all of the details to allocate resources.

I am very much looking forward to the option of "Open on PlayBook" for video. I'm sure other uses will come up too.

Ya, I agree that insiders have more information and thus are in a better position to judge. I still think they could have went bigger than wifi bridge and used a cloud-based solution.

Maybe i've gotten more negative on RIM lately...

[morlock_man]

How would a cloud-based solution have helped?

Do you want to pay for the data plan to cover your movie watching habits?

[ClassyBOLD]

How would a cloud-based solution have helped?

Do you want to pay for the data plan to cover your movie watching habits?

Cloud-based can also work over wifi. What I am saying is that the solution should sync without having to be on the same wifi network.

My point wasn't that wifi bridge is "useless." It's a welcome feature, I'm just not sure if it should be a high priority given the position RIM and BB10 are in.

Bottom line: in my opinion (and given my limited facts), the benefits of the feature are outweighed by it's costs. Who knows maybe I'll be proven wrong and RIM will demonstrate a use-case for this that realy justifies it.

[morlock_man]

Being able to stream HD movies from your phone's storage without needed a router is a pretty big step forwards. I don't see any other company working towards leveraging that level of technology.

Wifi Bridge gives you the ability to build a 'local cloud'. Its their working foundation for transparent distributing processing, another key feature that turns multiple devices into a single virtual unit.

Seamless and secure integration needs both of these technologies perfected and up and running before they turn their attention to anything else.

[Sith_Apprentice]

This will eventually (at least from what I am being told) be direct peer to peer WiFi connection with other BlackBerry devices for the purpose of sharing data etc. Think of Bridge, but instead of being limited to very slow BT technology, you can use 802.11N to do all of those tasks. MUCH higher speeds and much lower latency would mean that Bridge can be opened up to do alot more (distributed processing anyone?)

[morlock_man]

I've been thinking that this is the tech codenamed Rubicon and they're basically building a secure wifi data bus.

Wireless-N is a great starting point, but the AC spec will bring data rates up to gigabits of throughput. That will make for some damn impressive distributed processing.

[Sith_Apprentice]

I've been thinking that this is the tech codenamed Rubicon and they're basically building a secure wifi data bus.

Wireless-N is a great starting point, but the AC spec will bring data rates up to gigabits of throughput. That will make for some damn impressive distributed processing.

AC wont be around for quite a few years in any official capacity. It would make sense to have this A/B/G/N for now and build it future compatible.

[morlock_man]

AC wont be around for quite a few years in any official capacity. It would make sense to have this A/B/G/N for now and build it future compatible.

For sure. 2015 unless it gets some sort of mass adoption earlier on.

Either way, it'll be interesting to see. I remember helping to build a beowulf cluster out of dozens of old 286 and 386 machines. Was fairly simple once the project was configured, but the greatest time investment was just physically building the network.

It would be interesting (as a proof of concept) to see the kind of computing power you could get out of a Playbook beowulf cluster that just has a number of bridged playbooks tossed together into a pile.

[BaconMunch]

I see wifi bridge as much more than what we're seeing bridge as right now, I see it as data integration between embedded systems (BB10 devices on closed networks). Hopefully that is the direction and worth the developing investment so that we can see mature APIs to take connectivity to a whole new level.

[Sith_Apprentice]

For sure. 2015 unless it gets some sort of mass adoption earlier on.

Either way, it'll be interesting to see. I remember helping to build a beowulf cluster out of dozens of old 286 and 386 machines. Was fairly simple once the project was configured, but the greatest time investment was just physically building the network.

It would be interesting (as a proof of concept) to see the kind of computing power you could get out of a Playbook beowulf cluster that just has a number of bridged playbooks tossed together into a pile.

You know I am looking to build a beowulf cluster using Raspberry PI boards and/or Beagle Boards haha.

Figure it would be interesting project to see how small (physically) an area I can use to hold 20-30 machines.