View Poll Results: Do people actual believe journalism has no effect on public perception?

Voters
80. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, it has an effect

    65 81.25%
  • No, 'RIM is where they are because of themselves only'

    12 15.00%
  • Other, please explain

    3 3.75%
  1. hurds's Avatar
    You read a lot on these forums the talking point "RIM is exactly were they are because of only themselves".

    Now theres are multiple factors that contribute to a companies success/failure. Companies like Coke, Nike and Macdonalds don't spend billions on advertisement every year just for fun. Perception is extremely important. So to me statements like the above are narrowminded and naive.

    So I'm watching this documentary on youtube 'Synth Britannia Documentary' and at the 42 minute mark one of the commentators says that Gary Numan (well known for the song 'Cars') was subject to 'nasty nasty journalism that hindered his career.

    To me I'm not surprised that this type of thing could happen but to the "RIM is exactly were they are because of themselves" people, I feel they would think they whatever the journalists say must be true. Now I don't need any convincing it what I believe, I'm just curious as to what others people views are. Do you believe journalism plays a role in people careers, or corporations success?

    (please, if you don't like the analogy simply ignore it and answer the question 'do you believe journalism has an influence on public perception and thus on a corporations success?')

    Futhermore, I'm not denying other factors are not in play, I'm simply commenting on journalism and its affect on perception and whether people think its a factor at all. Some people seem to deny it plays a factor at all. A futher disscussion for later could be how big a factor it plays, but thats not what I'm asking here.
    Stewartj1 and pcguy514 like this.
    07-28-12 04:11 AM
  2. Alex_Hong's Avatar
    "do you believe journalism has an influence on public perception and thus on a corporations success?"

    I'm going to say i agree to a certain extent that journalism do have an influence on public perception. But I doubt it is the main factor that affects a corporations' success.

    For people who visit tech news sites, they will be pretty susceptible to the content of the article. If i have no opinion or love for a brand, I wouldn't be bothered to check out whether the contents are facts or not. I'll probably take it at face value as portrayed by the author. When exposed to enough such articles, you start to take it as a fact. And since its not a brand that i care about, i won't be bothered to verify the facts. So more or less, it will still be able to influence people.

    However, in terms of the corporation's success, i doubt it is the single most influential factor. Perhaps some influence. For most non tech savvy folks, they don't read tech review sites. Take the mobile industry for example. People would walk into a carrier store and look at phones available only then. They would then just go for the one that appeal to them most. Or they would base their purchase on word of mouth. A recommendation from a friend for example i think have more effect than journalism.

    ---

    The main thing i feel that will determine a corporation's success is probably having a solid product, and enough cash flow to follow through with it, plus an array of other factors. Take Palm for example. WebOS was brilliant, and the public's perception of it was pretty good. But they did not have the cash flow to sustain themselves, plus of course, certain carriers screwed them over at the last minute. WebOS received praises, winning best of show during CES. But that did not stop the "death spiral". Of course marketing and advertising helps too. So overall i would say a corporation's success is based on multiple factors, not journalism alone.

    Then look at the initial iPhone launch. Its review was pretty much mixed at that time. Some praised it for the revolution it brought, some forecasted its doom because the lack of certain features. But it still took off like a magnetic levitated and propelled train in vacuum. Which i think word of mouth, the cool factor, and marketing played a bigger role in the public's perception than just journalism itself.
    Last edited by Alex_Hong; 07-28-12 at 06:54 AM.
    Drew808 likes this.
    07-28-12 06:44 AM
  3. SnoozerBold's Avatar
    Its both really in regards to RIM. They put themselves in this position while at the same time every journalist seems to think they know what's best to do with RIM or they've already written them off. Which is bad for public perception prior to a major release but again RIM had a hand in putting them selves in this position. Its a vicious circle they've found themselves in.
    07-28-12 07:15 AM
  4. OniBerry's Avatar
    If RIM did not have troubles, if RIM listened to their shareholders, if RIM listened to members of the enterprise community, if RIM didn't d*ck around with the co-ceo model, if RIM had any clue on marketing....you get the point? I could go on.

    The fact is, the media would have very little to write about if RIM was up front with their customers/partners/shareholders, and kept their promises. The Media can destroy a company, but it doesn't mean that is what happened here. If a company does well, then the media wouldn't be tearing em a new one. OP makes it sound like they were minding their own business when all of a sudden the media just started hammering em. That isn't what happened.
    07-28-12 07:24 AM
  5. torndownunit's Avatar
    "do you believe journalism has an influence on public perception and thus on a corporations success?"

    I'm going to say i agree to a certain extent that journalism do have an influence on public perception. But I doubt it is the main factor that affects a corporations' success.

    For people who visit tech news sites, they will be pretty susceptible to the content of the article. If i have no opinion or love for a brand, I wouldn't be bothered to check out whether the contents are facts or not. I'll probably take it at face value as portrayed by the author. When exposed to enough such articles, you start to take it as a fact. And since its not a brand that i care about, i won't be bothered to verify the facts. So more or less, it will still be able to influence people.

    However, in terms of the corporation's success, i doubt it is the single most influential factor. Perhaps some influence. For most non tech savvy folks, they don't read tech review sites. Take the mobile industry for example. People would walk into a carrier store and look at phones available only then. They would then just go for the one that appeal to them most. Or they would base their purchase on word of mouth. A recommendation from a friend for example i think have more effect than journalism.

    ---

    The main thing i feel that will determine a corporation's success is probably having a solid product, and enough cash flow to follow through with it, plus an array of other factors. Take Palm for example. WebOS was brilliant, and the public's perception of it was pretty good. But they did not have the cash flow to sustain themselves, plus of course, certain carriers screwed them over at the last minute. WebOS received praises, winning best of show during CES. But that did not stop the "death spiral". Of course marketing and advertising helps too. So overall i would say a corporation's success is based on multiple factors, not journalism alone.

    Then look at the initial iPhone launch. Its review was pretty much mixed at that time. Some praised it for the revolution it brought, some forecasted its doom because the lack of certain features. But it still took off like a magnetic levitated and propelled train in vacuum. Which i think word of mouth, the cool factor, and marketing played a bigger role in the public's perception than just journalism itself.
    Excellent post. When the iPad initially came out, there were all kinds of mixed reviews, and reviews basically asking what the point of the device was. Yes, Apple's marketing is good, but people who write off Apple's success to just that are massively under estimating good old word of mouth from satisfied customers which plays a HUGE part in a products success. EG, using the Playbook as an example, it wasn't just the media that was voicing issues with the OS on it's initial release. Most users were quite upset over the initial lack of email, contacts, calendar. It was a major error on RIM's part. When that's the first buzz on a product, it's hard to overcome it.

    Yes media has obviously has an effect. But it's only one factor.
    Last edited by torndownunit; 07-28-12 at 07:41 AM.
    07-28-12 07:30 AM
  6. Drew808's Avatar
    While I believe journalism does have an effect on public perception to an extent but word of mouth in conjunction with journalism can deeply effect perception. The only way to counter this is to have a product or range of products that is equal or better than your competitors to negate that. You also cannot give journalist plenty of ammunition to destroy your image and render you irrelevant by delaying products, not being truthful with customers, laying off employees, etc.
    07-28-12 08:09 AM
  7. kbz1960's Avatar
    While RIM put themselves in the position they are in of course when all you see and hear is death, people are waiting to see the grim reaper.

    Why does anyone sell the most when they may in fact are not the best? Because bombardment of advertising and media backing. I can think of several products that have nothing to do with tech either. How about some lip syncers (I mean musicians) who can't sing a lick that are some of the more popular fakers (artist) around.
    pcguy514 likes this.
    07-28-12 08:37 AM
  8. qbnkelt's Avatar
    I put in Other because I believe that RIM is responsible for its own lack of vision, failing to see the wants of the consumer market and failing to recognise and act on a threat from upcoming competitors. AND I also feel that a formidable competitor in the person of Steve Jobs DID have a firm grasp and extraordinary acuity in seeing where the market would go if given a revolutionary product. The iOS experience is fluid, silky, easy. Android gives a feeling of power and seemingly undending customisation. The products are more than good enough to sell themselves. The proof is in the products and both those platforms have more than arrived.

    RIM is exceptional and without peers in the secure corporate world. Nothing out there today comes close to BES. Those who talk about Good and active sync are missing the key features that make BES indispensable for secure environments. Given that fact, RIM rested like a fat cat surrounded by lean and hungry competitors, and when the sole little pigeon appeared, was too slow to react. Others jumped on the prize. Lost its opportunity and found itself after the fact, wondering what happened. RIM has not understood what the consumer market was about.

    Given that, tech sites and wall street went to the fashionable, cutting edge, forward thinking platforms that were able to see what the consumer wanted. They correctly reported that RIM was indeed a fat cat who had lost its prize. But they went over the top. Their constant negative reporting and sensationalistic headlines has been putting nails in that poor cat's coffin for a couple of years now.

    Bring in product placement in movies, shows, news anchors, the weather channel, industries where apps for Android and iPhone are proclaimed yet Blackberries are never mentioned. These further place products other than BBerries at the forefront. Further erosion.

    Bring in the carriers. They will sell and push what is popular. Blackberries are relegated to the back of the store, at the end of an array of shiny, glass, featureless slabs that look almost identical, at a glance. But that is what has become popular. So that is what they push.

    RIM cannot blame the media or the carriers for its troubles. While I will carry a BB for as long as they continue to give me the things I value, the majorithy of North American consumers have absolutely moved on. RIM has a great part of the blame in what has happened; to say otherwise is to be an apologist. The media, carriers, tech sites have a great part in what has happened; to say otherwise is disingenuous.
    07-28-12 09:07 AM
  9. RJB55's Avatar
    Well said Qbnkelt. Thanks for saving me from trying to type out my thoughts before having coffee.
    07-28-12 10:00 AM
  10. amazinglygraceless's Avatar
    I said and pointed this out in another thread and it bears repeating. RIMs current
    woes have little to do with press driven perceptions. A great deal of the blame can
    and should be laid squarely at the feet of it's former CEOs and their lack of vision,
    focus, direction and incredibly short-sighted view of their customer needs and the
    threats posed by the competition. For example:

    "Cameraphones will be rejected by corporate users." � Mike Lazaridis, 2003. While some handsets, mostly BlackBerry models, do offer a 'no camera' option, that is more for the security of a business. There is no indication whatsoever that businessmen have rejected cameras on phones.
    After the Apple iPhone was introduced at WWDC in 2007 by Steve Jobs, the long nearly 6 month wait for the device gave the media plenty of time to get reactions from BlackBerry executives like Jim Balsillie. "[Apple and the iPhone is] kind of one more entrant into an already very busy space with lots of choice for consumers � But in terms of a sort of a sea-change for BlackBerry, I would think that's overstating it."� Jim Balsillie, February 2007.
    Two months later, Balsillie is back for more comments on the Apple iPhone, which had not yet been released, "Again, I have said this before and I will say it again; Apple has done the industry an enormous favour because they basically told the world to expect a media player [the iPod] as a software feature on a good smartphone. As the leading smartphone appliance company and platform company, we could not buy that kind of validation for $100m."�Jim Balsillie, April 2007.
    Because BlackBerry handsets had always had a very usable physical QWERTY keyboard, RIM executives were quite sensitive to the fact that the Apple iPhone did not offer one. "As nice as the Apple iPhone is, it poses a real challenge to its users. Try typing a web key on a touchscreen on an Apple iPhone, that's a real challenge. You cannot see what you type." � Jim Balsillie, November 2007. "The most exciting mobile trend is full Qwerty keyboards. I'm sorry, it really is. I'm not making this up."-Mike Lazaridis, May 2008. Six months after the latter comment, in response to the Apple iPhone, RIM would release the BlackBerry Storm with its SurePress typing system that was supposed to feel like you were typing on a physical keyboard. The phone launched with half-baked software leading Jim Balsillie to say that smartphone buyers should expect future models to launch with bugs and glitches. While RIM said SurePress was here to stay, as you know, it wasn't.
    When it appeared as though a market was developing for tablets, you would have thought that Lazaridis and Balsillie would have learned their lesson from the iPhone. "So the question you have to ask yourself is when it comes to tablet, what market or what opportunities, still, it's solving, what problem is it solving, and is it just a replacement laptop? I think that's a difficult one to judge." Mike Lazaridis, April 2010. Six months later, RIM announced the BlackBerry PlayBook which was launched with no calendar and, incredibly enough for a company that prides itself on its messaging technology, no email client either.
    RIM had also been characteristically late to the apps game. And if you want to know why, just read this comment. "There may be 300,000 apps for the iPhone and iPad, but the only app you really need is the browser. You don't need an app for the web ... You don't need to go through some kind of SDK ... You can use your web tools ... And you can publish your apps to the BlackBerry without writing any native code."-Jim Balsillie, November 2010.
    Source: They said what? Great quotes from Jim Balsillie and Mike Lazaridis

    While it is fashionable to heap invective at the press for maligning RIM, the press
    reports what IS. To not see that RIMs condition is the result of poor management,
    stale products (Curve, Bold, Torch and just about everything after is not much
    more than gussied up Pearls), tone deafness to it's customers wants / needs, a
    string of poorly designed products (Storm, the first Torch, Playbook) and an utter
    failure to read the market is the height of naivety.

    Now, can this be turn around? Yes, of course it can. To do that though requires
    both RIM and it's customers (of which I am one) to get real about how it got here,
    give Mr Heins and his team the time and space to move forward and most of all
    stop hyperventilating over how the press has been really "mean" to RIM.
    Last edited by amazinglygraceless; 07-28-12 at 10:38 AM.
    07-28-12 10:34 AM
  11. iankeiththomas's Avatar
    Amazinglygraceless completely nailed it. The reason that the idea that RIM would be doing fine if only it weren't for that darn media is a paranoid fantasy is because the reasons for RIM's current situation are obvious and well-known. The media doesn't *have* to have formed some kind of anti-RIM cabal because there's plenty of legitimate, damning, material to report on.
    07-28-12 10:48 AM
  12. Branta's Avatar
    There seems to be a feedback loop between hostile press coverage and hostile analyst reports creating self-fulfilling prophesy. Which one is the primary driver is open to debate, particularly when selective quoting and mindless repetition of the same few articles across multiple platforms creates a "squeaky wheel" effect and a false migration from opinion into perception as proven fact.
    TheScionicMan likes this.
    07-28-12 11:19 AM
  13. Roo Zilla's Avatar
    Maybe the media and negative coverage has had an affect on the opinions of phone geeks, but in general, not really. I don't know whether Engadget is the top tech site on the internet, but according to Alexa, they're ranked number 457. Now compare that to a regular news site like CNN and you get number 69. Viewership trails off almost exponentially as rankings drop, that 457 vs 69 is not even in the same ball park. The point of this is that the general public never sees much press about the Blackberry, let alone negative press. The only times they really hear anything about Blackberry is when they go to the phone store to buy a new phone and salesperson there tell them about it.
    07-28-12 11:37 AM
  14. Alex_Hong's Avatar
    "Cameraphones will be rejected by corporate users." � Mike Lazaridis, 2003. While some handsets, mostly BlackBerry models, do offer a 'no camera' option, that is more for the security of a business. There is no indication whatsoever that businessmen have rejected cameras on phones.
    This kind of resonates with me. Haha. And you're right in saying that there's no indication that corporate users reject camera phones. It because of security that the corporate reject camera phones.

    My country still has a conscripted army. All males are mandated to serve 2 years in various services after their tertiary education. In army, navy, or civil defense, with a majority being designated to army. Any form of image capturing devices are banned from most military installations in the name of security. Plus it has to be certified by by the carriers to be non camera out of the box, and aftermarket modification of handsets are not allowed as well. In fact, my first BlackBerry was a non camera model.

    But as troublesome as most of us feel that it is, it is also the reason there are that many BlackBerry devices here. In fact, because of its non camera models, it has become the number 1 choice of smartphone for servicemen. Which is also why i got a BlackBerry in the first place. Many disliked it as there isn't much apps and games you can use with it unlike the other platforms, but for me i loved it. In some weird twist of fate, I'm guessing RIM is actually doing quite well here because of its non camera variant of devices. In fact, non camera BlackBerry retains their value better. I sold my old non camera variant of the Bold 9000 at the same price i bought my used camera variant of a curve 9360. Insanity. A non camera variant of the curve 9360 cost 40 USD more than the normal one, which i found out recently was a mark up by our carriers (RIM actually sell both variants to the carriers at the same rate).

    However, many promptly switch away after they complete their service. Most people i know use it because its the only choice they have, as mentioned above, many disliked it as there isn't much apps and games you can use with it unlike the other platforms. If RIM could offer a non camera variant of BB10, I'm sure it will sell very well here. Plus, servicemen get to have a good experience that they could probably continue using the phone even after their service, even recommending it to their friends. This could be a good opportunity for RIM, provided if BB10 is solid.

    (A while back one of our local carrier starting selling their own version of non camera iPhones, it sold like hotcakes, but Apple soon clamp down on them, not wanting them to modify their internals. Probably threatened to not allow them to sell the next iphone, hahaha.)

    Despite the quote from Mike L, offering non camera variants might be a good strategy to penetrate the Singapore market.
    07-28-12 11:54 AM
  15. Roo Zilla's Avatar
    There seems to be a feedback loop between hostile press coverage and hostile analyst reports creating self-fulfilling prophesy. Which one is the primary driver is open to debate, particularly when selective quoting and mindless repetition of the same few articles across multiple platforms creates a "squeaky wheel" effect and a false migration from opinion into perception as proven fact.
    Remember "Antennagate?" I don't think there was a bigger negative tech story that got as much press in the tech media as Antennagate did in recent years. Go on youtube, you'll find hundreds, if not thousands of videos showing the antenna issue on the iPhone 4. It was so big it got onto the mainstream press and was on CNN and got negative comments from everybody from the NY Times to Consumer Reports. The story was so big it got it's own name. Did Antennagate change public perception of Apple? Maybe it did, but it seems most people didn't care.
    07-28-12 11:56 AM
  16. Toodeurep's Avatar
    Well, from an absolutist stand point, I found it hard to answer this poll.

    First of all the title isn't directly in regards to RIM so it lends to me asking how could anybody in clear thought choose the second choice. Now if it where in regards to RIM and RIM only, which is what I believe we are answering. I would have to say 99.999% yes. Why not 100% you didn't ask? Because I have someone in my house right now that didn't buy a BB because of the news they read online. So I can say with certainty that yes it does have an effect and that is a fact.

    Now as far as the idea that "RIM is where they are because of themselves only" I say absolutely. I know of no one here that can say that they are more successful than the former CEOs of RIM. RIM may ultimately fade into oblivion (something that I doubt) but let us not lose sight that any of us would love to have had their success and their "problems".

    To me, this at worst is the standard cycle of business. They start, grow (or fail), evolve (or fail) and ultimately in either a supernova like explosion or a cartoonish puff of smoke fade away. Very few organizations will enjoy successes like what RIM has had.
    07-28-12 11:59 AM
  17. Roo Zilla's Avatar
    Despite the quote from Mike L, offering non camera variants might be a good strategy to penetrate the Singapore market.
    Yes, because Singapore, with it's population of 5M, is an important market to penetrate. You realize that's less than 2% of the population of the USA. If you were RIM, which market would you concentrate on? The one with a population of 300M with sales of approximately 100M smartphones, or 5M and sales of a perhaps 4-5 million? Hate to tell it to you, but Singapore is an afterthought for major manufacturers, it's not a make or break market.
    07-28-12 12:02 PM
  18. PedroBorgas's Avatar
    Just responding to the title of this thread:

    People will believe in every info or uninformation, depending on whoever tells them. And sometimes, then only ear and see whatever they want to ear and see.

    So perception is changed by( any kind of) journalism, for sure.

    Sent from a beautiful but old BB 8520 or a new and shinny PB 2.0
    07-28-12 12:05 PM
  19. Deu2e's Avatar
    As far as the poll goes, I chose option 1. Yes, the media does have an effect on public perception. Is this the main cause for the position that RIM is in today? Absolutely not. It has been my experience that many people believe without fault whatever they see, read, or hear. They won't question it, or try to verify the information at all. Just like those who heard that there won't be any keyboard BB10 phones coming out. They just heard the info and ran with it. I've heard plenty of people say that they want XYZ item just because a celeb, blogger, or other "authority" figure "said so." This includes BB.

    On another note, I think there are various sides to the media output when it comes to BB phones. The main thing we hear is that they aren't up to date spec and performance wise when compared to Apple and Android, which is is mainly true. But BBs have also been taken out of the smartphone category altogether. Last night while watching the opening Olympic ceremony, I caught the end of a commercial, not sure which one, but I heard "smartphones and BlackBerries." That phrase separated a BlackBerry from being a smartphone. It wasn't inclusive at all, at least to me it didn't sound that way.

    So yes, while RIM has done this to themselves (mainly by not working toward forward technological momentum thinking that their name will keep them popular, IMO), the media and journalism does help to plant certain thoughts about certain items.
    07-28-12 01:51 PM
  20. amazinglygraceless's Avatar
    Last night while watching the opening Olympic ceremony, I caught the end of a commercial, not sure which one, but I heard "smartphones and BlackBerries." That phrase separated a BlackBerry from being a smartphone. It wasn't inclusive at all, at least to me it didn't sound that way.
    The other way to look at that (and it is how I do) is that BlackBerry is in
    a category all it's own. Everything else is so similar there is no point to
    making a distinction between them.

    I don't see that as a slight, I see it as a tacit acknowledgement that
    BlackBerry stands apart from the rest.
    Last edited by amazinglygraceless; 07-28-12 at 02:05 PM.
    07-28-12 02:03 PM
  21. aniym's Avatar
    The other way to look at that (and it is how I do) is that BlackBerry is in
    a category all it's own. Everything else is so similar there is no point to
    making a distinction between them.

    I don't see that as a slight, I see it as a tacit acknowledgement that
    BlackBerry stands apart from the rest.
    That's a pretty generous interpretation. What Blackberries (not PB or BB10) are known for are a lack of apps and a primitive browsing experience. BB7 has done a lot to fix the latter, but the former is still a big problem. A lot of people think BBs don't have touchscreens and I don't blame them, as RIM has been using almost the exact same design as phones from 5 years ago. Is it any wonder that people think the innards have stayed the same.

    The same could be said about the iphone, but even BGR ran an article saying that the iPhone was 'getting boring'. Regardless, the IP1 successfully established itself as a web browsing and app-centric phone right out of the gate, so potential customers are in no doubt about those aspects when they consider it as a purchase. BBs on the other hand...
    07-28-12 03:24 PM
  22. lnichols's Avatar
    RIM does have a hand to play in the position it is in (constantly missing self imposed deadlines, slow transition, not catering to end user). That siad though the media seems to way more critical of RIM than they should. There seems to be a need to bash RIM daily in the press. I'm ok with bad press on missed earnings, deadlines, etc., but RIM isn't making bad news daily, but the press want to keep them in the gunsights every day.

    Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Crackberry App!
    07-28-12 04:17 PM
  23. Alex_Hong's Avatar
    Yes, because Singapore, with it's population of 5M, is an important market to penetrate. You realize that's less than 2% of the population of the USA. If you were RIM, which market would you concentrate on? The one with a population of 300M with sales of approximately 100M smartphones, or 5M and sales of a perhaps 4-5 million? Hate to tell it to you, but Singapore is an afterthought for major manufacturers, it's not a make or break market.
    I'm just saying that it can be a good strategy to penetrate the singapore market by having a non camera model as well eventually. I have not mentioned in any point of time that Singapore is an important market they should concentrate on. Please read carefully before posting.

    In terms of importance, i think the global market is the most important, in fact any market is important for RIM. Not just USA alone. India has an even bigger market than USA. RIM can't afford to think of any country as being an afterthought.

    ---

    Despite being an afterthought, Singapore is an extremely easy market to cater to. All carriers use the same bands, and these are similar other countries as well. So phones work across carriers. Plus phones has to be unlocked by law. Singapore is number 1 in terms of smartphone penetration with over 50%, so people here are rather tech savvy in general. Since the phones are unlocked, people from the region, and other countries can easily purchase mobile devices there during business trips or holidays (provided their country uses the same gsm bands).

    So, yes. its not a make or break market. But that doesn't mean RIM should put in any effort in it at all. I'm sure that's why RIM has regional managing directors, to make it easier to concentrate on more markets. Even apple has a headquarter in Singapore.
    Last edited by Alex_Hong; 07-28-12 at 05:28 PM.
    07-28-12 05:14 PM
  24. qbnkelt's Avatar
    That's a pretty generous interpretation. What Blackberries (not PB or BB10) are known for are a lack of apps and a primitive browsing experience. BB7 has done a lot to fix the latter, but the former is still a big problem. A lot of people think BBs don't have touchscreens and I don't blame them, as RIM has been using almost the exact same design as phones from 5 years ago. Is it any wonder that people think the innards have stayed the same.

    The same could be said about the iphone, but even BGR ran an article saying that the iPhone was 'getting boring'. Regardless, the IP1 successfully established itself as a web browsing and app-centric phone right out of the gate, so potential customers are in no doubt about those aspects when they consider it as a purchase. BBs on the other hand...

    Actually, the App store did not launch with the iPhone. It wasn't until the 3G came out.

    Forbes: iPhone App Store could launch Thursday | Apple - CNET News

    I was having this conversation with my luuuuuuv earlier today...he's staunchly anti-iPhone but he actually mentioning considering an Android tablet which blew my mind....as to the app issue on BB.

    With the single exception of the DC Circulator app and WhatsApp, I've got the same exact apps on my iPhone, my Android and my BB. I don't buy a device for the apps I might get later, I buy a device for what it does right out of the box. I add apps as I go based on what the phones lack. Interestingly, given the apps I've got on all three platforms I use, there is no absence of the apps I use.

    As far as the browser, yes, BB7 has fixed that. Aside from flash, there isn't one single site that I can access on Android that I can't access on my BB and there isn't a single site that I can access on my iPhone that I can't access on my BB. The BB7 webkit is just as effective on the BB as it on the iPhone. So that is a non issue for me.

    For touchscreen...I prefer keyboards. And while touchscreens have become the preferred input medium, I will always prefer my 9900's typing experience over my Skyrocket. The iPhone is second to my 9900, that keyboard is almost as effective. Too bad the UI has become as boring as a rerun of a bad 70s sitcom.
    Alex_Hong likes this.
    07-28-12 05:23 PM
  25. torndownunit's Avatar
    RIM does have a hand to play in the position it is in (constantly missing self imposed deadlines, slow transition, not catering to end user). That siad though the media seems to way more critical of RIM than they should. There seems to be a need to bash RIM daily in the press. I'm ok with bad press on missed earnings, deadlines, etc., but RIM isn't making bad news daily, but the press want to keep them in the gunsights every day.

    Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Crackberry App!
    I think people look a little too much into this at times. There are a ton of these tech sites, and they are all looking for daily content. A ton of them don't write original content, and just post articles from other news sources. They post whatever news they find relating to pretty much ALL tech companies. The problem is, what good news have they had to report from RIM lately? There are obviously writers out there writing opinion pieces that can be biased hatchet jobs, but in a ton of cases the sites are just reposting articles from general news sites and those articles are simply reporting the news. The RIM current news is unfortunately not very good though.
    07-28-12 05:30 PM
69 123
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD