- We had this conversation more than once, and the conclusion is definitely that updating BBOS wouldn't have changed anything.
BBOS was made for another paradigm.
Making BBOS work well with touchscreens didn't even work, so that's an OS 99.5% (at least) would never buy today.
When we talk about apps, performance, ecosystem and all those other things that dominate the potential buyers behaviour, we also know that continuing to modernise BBOS wouldn't have changed anything.
Every single person complaining about the BBOS performance, hourglasses, battery pulls, restarts after app downloads, the crappy browser etc. all asked for a new OS in reality, because it was impossible to make BBOS perform like at least 99.5% of buyers want a phone OS to perform today.
We also established that BBOS started to tank immediately, after Apple and Google entered the market in a serious fashion.
Proving, that buyers preferred the Google/Apple paradigm vastly to the BlackBerry paradigm.
Look BelfastD, I honestly started to like you over the years, no matter how much I agreed or disagreed with you, but you honestly can't be serious if you are still thinking that an upgraded BBOS device would have actually helped BlackBerry more, than to try to adapt to a new user paradigm.
The new paradigm killed Symbian and BBOS (and Symbian was faaaaaaaaar bigger than BBOS) and it became clear that this would happen, in 2010 already.
We are nearly in the year of 2015 now, please BelfastD, just start to accept the market realities.
BBOS just isn't an OS the incredibly vast majority of the market wants. It just isn't an OS that can perform well enough, for our current user paradigm.
I kind of understood when you argued in favour of BBOS when we had January 2013. In 2015 however, it's just being in denial, of what happens in the marketplace and has happened for years already.
As always, I do however admire the passion with which you are clinging onto the thought, that BBOS has the potential of being an OS that would have any impact in 2015.
A change was needed, rebuild BBOS on QNX and get rid of previous limitations as well as remove BIS artificial limitation was what I thought they were planning. Not a brand new completely alien OS.
Staying with BBOS the way it was would've been bad, but nowhere near as bad as changing to BB10.12-26-14 07:43 AMLike 0 - BB 10 was the best move they ever did...compare to storm series which was crap. Now they have a touch screen that works and well12-26-14 08:15 AMLike 3
-
- We can argue all day about BBOS and how bad may or may have not been but in the light of 2 years of BB10 monumental failure I hope we can both agree that the the change to BB10 has been a bad idea.
A change was needed, rebuild BBOS on QNX and get rid of previous limitations as well as remove BIS artificial limitation was what I thought they were planning. Not a brand new completely alien OS.
Staying with BBOS the way it was would've been bad, but nowhere near as bad as changing to BB10.
My stance hasn't changed though and I might misunderstand you...
But what you are saying is that they should have kept the whole GUI and UX of BBOS, just replacing the underlying code base through QNX?
If you think that would have been a better solution, you still don't understand what the market wants.
The market demanded a completely new UX and GUI.
BBOS was totally archaic and user unfriendly, in those regards. Just like Symbian.
The new (now old, tried, tested and kept) UI paradigm was the iPhone way, not BBOS way.
Emulating the BBOS experience in a market that asks for the Android/iOS paradigm (around 99.5% this year), would have been just as suicidal as keeping BBOS 6.1.
I understand that you wanted your BIS, your keyboard shortcuts and your 5000 cluttered options in the settings menu...
We had that one and a half years already.
But in the end, I was correct. Today the Apple/iOS/BB10/WP paradigm has over 99.5% marketshare.
And all of those are radically different than BBOS.
The only point where I agree, is when you say that BB10 itself might not have been an ideal implementation.
But going as far away from BBOS as possible, while keeping some of the features was the only right move.
People had enough of BBOS and not only because of the underlying Java code base.
The whole UI and UX was subpar because the OS and design was conceived for another era.
In 2007, the BlackBerry way made sense, because we didn't have anything better to compare it to.
And then came the iPhone.
You prefer that design, and that's ok. But 99.5%+ of the market don't want to ever come close to that paradigm (again).
(btw, we had that some 1000 times already, but BB10's monumental failure wasn't BB10's fault per se. BB10 came 5 years too late because the morons at BB HQ were too arrogant to understand that their product (BBOS) was made obsolete the moment the iPhone launched. BB10's only fault was that it came to late.)12-26-14 09:43 AMLike 4 -
(btw, we had that some 1000 times already, but BB10's monumental failure wasn't BB10's fault per se. BB10 came 5 years too late because the morons at BB HQ were too arrogant to understand that their product (BBOS) was made obsolete the moment the iPhone launched. BB10's only fault was that it came to late.)MarsupilamiX likes this.12-26-14 10:18 AMLike 1 -
*BBOS killed BlackBerry several years ago* because, by design, it was incapable of delivering the type of performance and flexibility 99.4% of the market came to expect.
Please,.. stop praising BBOS. It's what most everyone remembers as the BlackBerry they wanted to throw out the window for that crummy browser and endless hourglassing... and because of that deeply ingrained negative taste BBOS left in everyone's mouth, very few were willing to even take a glance at BB10.
BlackBerry should have transitioned away from BBOS as soon as the first Storm revealed how poorly the Java-based architecture performed at delivering a modern smartphone experience.
The only reason there is anything left to praise about that disgrace of an OS is because years ago BlackBerry managed to swindle carriers into paying a monthly fee for selling the only real thing that was available at that point. Something that says more about its archaic roots than about its merits as an OS.
Posted via CB1012-26-14 10:36 AMLike 3 -
They could very well be the Android of today.
That was a young, unsaturated market, without much competition.
The first mover advantage in that situation is so damn important.
(obviously Apple was the first mover, but Android made the smartphone available on a mass scale)TgeekB and Prem WatsApp like this.12-26-14 10:41 AMLike 2 - BlackBerry should have transitioned away from BBOS as soon as the first Storm revealed how poorly the Java-based architecture performed at delivering a modern smartphone experience.
So trueDave Bourque likes this.12-26-14 11:12 AMLike 1 - From August 2010
BlackBerry Smartphones Should Use Android: 10 Reasons Why - Mobile and Wireless - News & Reviews - eWeek.com
At the very least - BlackBerry would have been more successful had they just used the Playbook type OS and running Android apps on a Dev Alpha hand set coming to the market in early 2012.Last edited by Bbnivende; 12-26-14 at 12:15 PM.
MarsupilamiX likes this.12-26-14 12:03 PMLike 1 - There was a very good article here in crackberry explaining how all development and transition happened. BlackBerry has no option than changing OS.
Staying on the old OS would have been a mistake. The time it has taken bb10 to develop has been a big mistake too.
If when the z10 came out, we had 10.3 and blend available then. I still think it would not have been great.
If bb10 is better than droid and iPhone but not that better to make a difference.
The playbook fiasco has a lot to do with this.
Posted via CB1012-26-14 12:22 PMLike 0 - To stay with BBOS the way it was would've been a mistake
To change to BB10 was a HUGE mistake, Android apps was a HUGE mistake
To keep the good parts from BBOS and build it back on top of QNX would've been the way to go.
Keep the old apps, keep the old developers, keep the old BIS and BES, keep the existing customers.
Easy transition.12-26-14 01:07 PMLike 0 - To stay with BBOS the way it was would've been a mistake
To change to BB10 was a HUGE mistake, Android apps was a HUGE mistake
To keep the good parts from BBOS and build it back on top of QNX would've been the way to go.
Keep the old apps, keep the old developers, keep the old BIS and BES, keep the existing customers.
Easy transition.
Posted via CB1012-26-14 01:18 PMLike 3 - Again hindsight is 20 / 20. BBOS and blackBerry had some big problems in 2011. They had a four day BIS outage and their new 9900 was bricking right away. They had already told the public that BBOS 7 would not be available to older models and that the new phones would be running QNX. My purchase on a 9900 in November 2011 was pretty stupid.
Still... what if BlackBerry had committed to upgrading BBOS on their PKB phones . They probably would not have lost as much market share as they eventually did. They could have concentrated all of their efforts to the development of the Z10. The PKB phones could have developed under BBOS for at least one or two more years.
It is interesting that the Milan was a new slider developed in late 2011 and would have used BBOS but the carriers said no. They knew that BB-7 was orphaned and they would not sell it.
The problem with the Playbook is that it should never have been developed as a business device. Had it used Android apps and had native e-mail from the inception It might have been more successful. The e-mail problem was caused by trying to get the Playbook to work under BES. There was no market for a business tablet.
Trying to bring native apps to BB10 was a huge waste of money and development time.
So in my opinion BBOS was orphaned too soon and that an all touch BlackBerry Colt running a version of QNX should have come to market in early 2012.
Water under the bridge. Don't orphan your manufactured good until you have a well developed replacement.
BD - while the 9900 had generally good reviews the menu driven BBOS was not highly regarded. The hardware was just OK but the OS wasn't. I recall that I liked Playbook 2.0 but for the crappy browser and lack of apps.12-26-14 01:43 PMLike 0 - Again hindsight is 20 / 20. BBOS and blackBerry had some big problems in 2011. They had a four day BIS outage and their new 9900 was bricking right away. They had already told the public that BBOS 7 would not be available to older models and that the new phones would be running QNX. My purchase on a 9900 in November 2011 was pretty stupid.
Still... what if BlackBerry had committed to upgrading BBOS on their PKB phones . They probably would not have lost as much market share as they eventually did. They could have concentrated all of their efforts to the development of the Z10. The PKB phones could have developed under BBOS for at least one or two more years.
It is interesting that the Milan was a new slider developed in late 2011 and would have used BBOS but the carriers said no. They knew that BB-7 was orphaned and they would not sell it.
The problem with the Playbook is that it should never have been developed as a business device. Had it used Android apps and had native e-mail from the inception It might have been more successful. The e-mail problem was caused by trying to get the Playbook to work under BES. There was no market for a business tablet.
Trying to bring native apps to BB10 was a huge waste of money and development time.
So in my opinion BBOS was orphaned too soon and that an all touch BlackBerry Colt running a version of QNX should have come to market in early 2012.
Water under the bridge. Don't orphan your manufactured good until you have a well developed replacement.
BD - while the 9900 had generally good reviews the menu driven BBOS was not highly regarded. The hardware was just OK but the OS wasn't.
I've always said the 9900 was nowhere near what it could've or should've been, it was late and the hardware was updated at the last moment hence all the OS bugs, it took 6 months or longer to activate the NFC and wifi hotspot features. In the 9790 it took a year or longer to get them.
As much as I liked it the 9900 was a disaster launch really and BB never learned anything from it, hiw long did it take to activate the FM radio in BB10?12-26-14 01:53 PMLike 0 -
- I can envision BD having a room in his house dedicated to the memory of BBOS. He sits in there quietly remembering a day when the world was so much better and how, now, the world is in a state of disarray because BBOS is not the leader it once was.
Belfast, don't take my comments as an attack. It's just that it's been several years now that you have been saying the same thing. The world has moved on and you are a smart guy that could contribute to more current events. I hope you do some day.
Posted from my Classic.12-26-14 02:02 PMLike 3 -
4 years after BB7 was lunched still sales even though the range has been shrunken to 1 or 2 devices, only 1 available from only a few carriers.
CB members in no way reflect the reality for BB12-26-14 02:04 PMLike 0 - As an OS and as a concept, there is nothing wrong with BB10, other than, IMO, it should have had a home screen and virtual navigation buttons (Home and Back) that would have eased the transition for many people, but could have been shut off by those who wanted pure gestures.
BB10 wasn't the mistake - the mistake was waiting until 2011 to begin working on BB10. And that was a huge, colossal mistake. When the iPhone launch proved to be successful, and when Google launched Android in 2007, BB should have immediately realized that BBOS could never have the potential (from a software point of view) that these OSs had, and work should have begun on a new, modern OS. That would have given BB the ability to release BB10 in 2010, a full 3 years earlier, when BB was regarded MUCH differently in the market, and when their financial situation was MUCH stronger.
Releasing in 2010, even if they were releasing what we know as 10.0, would have garnered FAR more developer support, and could have allowed native BB10 to be at least competitive in the app market, and there would be no Android player to discuss - it wouldn't have been necessary.
By waiting so long, BB doomed themselves to also-ran status and a huge financial loss (BB10 is still billions in the red at this point). That was Mike and Jim's hubris at work.
Sure, BB's advertising was still awful, and poor choices in devices and specs could have caused problems, but in 2010, people would have been much more forgiving of a new OS's teething problems than they were prepared to be in 2013.12-26-14 02:15 PMLike 4 - BD - The only sales that BBOS has had in the past year are because business replaced some 9900's as they were awaiting BES 12 and the Z10/Q10 were not very good. Secondly, the most sales were of lower end devices sold for cheap prices in Nigeria and other similar countries. It has nothing to do with the inherent goodness of BBOS. Bad sales of BB10 devices has nothing to do with the goodness of old RIM designed devices and BBOS.12-26-14 02:23 PMLike 0
- As an OS and as a concept, there is nothing wrong with BB10, other than, IMO, it should have had a home screen and virtual navigation buttons (Home and Back) that would have eased the transition for many people, but could have been shut off by those who wanted pure gestures.
BB10 wasn't the mistake - the mistake was waiting until 2011 to begin working on BB10. And that was a huge, colossal mistake. When the iPhone launch proved to be successful, and when Google launched Android in 2007, BB should have immediately realized that BBOS could never have the potential (from a software point of view) that these OSs had, and work should have begun on a new, modern OS. That would have given BB the ability to release BB10 in 2010, a full 3 years earlier, when BB was regarded MUCH differently in the market, and when their financial situation was MUCH stronger.
Releasing in 2010, even if they were releasing what we know as 10.0, would have garnered FAR more developer support, and could have allowed native BB10 to be at least competitive in the app market, and there would be no Android player to discuss - it wouldn't have been necessary.
By waiting so long, BB doomed themselves to also-ran status and a huge financial loss (BB10 is still billions in the red at this point). That was Mike and Jim's hubris at work.
Sure, BB's advertising was still awful, and poor choices in devices and specs could have caused problems, but in 2010, people would have been much more forgiving of a new OS's teething problems than they were prepared to be in 2013.
They should've abandoned it as soon as the PlayBook launched, they went from an OS that integrated all apps with each other to the Playbook OS that ran every single app separately with absolutely on integration. They should've realised it was doomed right then.12-26-14 02:25 PMLike 0 - Don't kid yourself, they started working on BB10 (in the PlayBook form) long before they even bought QNX not 2011, the problem was building it in complete secret with no input from BBOS engineers, built by arrogant people who thought they knew best.
They should've abandoned it as soon as the PlayBook launched, they went from an OS that integrated all apps with each other to the Playbook OS that ran every single app separately with absolutely on integration. They should've realised it was doomed right then.
Posted from my Classic.12-26-14 02:27 PMLike 0 - BD - The only sales that BBOS has had in the past year are because business replaced some 9900's as they were awaiting BES 12 and the Z10/Q10 were not very good. Secondly, the most sales were of lower end devices sold for cheap prices in Nigeria and other similar countries. It has nothing to do with the inherent goodness of BBOS. Bad sales of BB10 devices has nothing to do with the goodness of old RIM designed devices and BBOS.12-26-14 02:28 PMLike 0
-
- As an OS and as a concept, there is nothing wrong with BB10, other than, IMO, it should have had a home screen and virtual navigation buttons (Home and Back) that would have eased the transition for many people, but could have been shut off by those who wanted pure gestures.
BB10 wasn't the mistake - the mistake was waiting until 2011 to begin working on BB10. And that was a huge, colossal mistake. When the iPhone launch proved to be successful, and when Google launched Android in 2007, BB should have immediately realized that BBOS could never have the potential (from a software point of view) that these OSs had, and work should have begun on a new, modern OS. That would have given BB the ability to release BB10 in 2010, a full 3 years earlier, when BB was regarded MUCH differently in the market, and when their financial situation was MUCH stronger.
Releasing in 2010, even if they were releasing what we know as 10.0, would have garnered FAR more developer support, and could have allowed native BB10 to be at least competitive in the app market, and there would be no Android player to discuss - it wouldn't have been necessary.
By waiting so long, BB doomed themselves to also-ran status and a huge financial loss (BB10 is still billions in the red at this point). That was Mike and Jim's hubris at work.
Sure, BB's advertising was still awful, and poor choices in devices and specs could have caused problems, but in 2010, people would have been much more forgiving of a new OS's teething problems than they were prepared to be in 2013.Don't kid yourself, they started working on BB10 (in the PlayBook form) long before they even bought QNX not 2011, the problem was building it in complete secret with no input from BBOS engineers, built by arrogant people who thought they knew best.
They should've abandoned it as soon as the PlayBook launched, they went from an OS that integrated all apps with each other to the Playbook OS that ran every single app separately with absolutely on integration. They should've realised it was doomed right then.
RIM Unveils The BlackBerry PlayBook
September 2010
Yes, BlackBerry had really poor management 2007 and on. Their initial success just masked all of the companies systemic problems. Neither BBOS or BB10 has been a success to date. Maybe next year ??
Interesting reading for us historians: The Rise and Fall of BlackBerry: An Oral History
http://www.businessweek.com/articles...n-oral-history12-26-14 02:41 PMLike 0
- Forum
- Popular at CrackBerry
- General BlackBerry News, Discussion & Rumors
Legacy vs BB10 numbers?
Similar Threads
-
What is the difference between the Passport SQW100-1 vs SQW100-3?
By CrackBerry Question in forum Ask a QuestionReplies: 4Last Post: 09-28-15, 11:31 AM -
Copying linked contacts - Android to BB10
By riph in forum BlackBerry PassportReplies: 1Last Post: 02-09-15, 03:26 PM -
Ordering Classic from ShopBB vs Amazon Benefits?
By Clark Smith in forum BlackBerry ClassicReplies: 13Last Post: 12-23-14, 05:52 AM -
How do I block a phone number on a Q5?
By briann1 in forum BlackBerry Q5Replies: 5Last Post: 12-22-14, 04:23 AM -
Passport vs Classic
By blicked in forum BlackBerry ClassicReplies: 17Last Post: 12-20-14, 08:03 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD