Question for Alec Saunders
Here is a question I would like someone from Team Crackberry to put to Alec Saunders, and it has to do with the future and it's important so I hope it's appropriate to post here.
Why can't I get the New York Times App on my Playbook? Why will the NYT not even port their Android App to the Playbook? Simple question, but extreemly important.
I appreciate everything RIM is trying to do with Blackberry Jam, but in focusing on getting lots of apps for BB10, RIM seems to be missing getting big-name and important content on their devices.
A while back I sideloaded apps from NYT, FT (Financial Times) and The Economist onto my playbook. I subscribed to print version of each in the past, but let those subscriptions lapse. Once I got these sideloaded I subscribed to each company. That's right, they made money from me. Since then the NYT and FT Apps have stopped working. I'm thinking of cancelling my FT subscription and will do so for The Economist if it stops working.
Given that porting the apps over would lead to subscription sales I ask: why don't they do it? Why is RIM not knocking of the doors of these companies and saying "we'll do everything just sign it over. You've already written the app, it already works on the Playbook, just sign it over"?
The same for a CIBC banking app (it's a Canadian Bank for God's sake). Why is the app not ported over?
Why is this an issue and not just a rant?
Because RIM needs to understand that consumers want to bring their world to their devices, that is, they want the companies they already deal with on their devices. They don't want to change their world to suit what devices have to offer.
Fine, court small start up developers, but why is RIM forgetting about the headline consumer companies we all deal with on a daily basis?
Would someone on Team Crackberry please put the questions to A. Saunders. I've asked on twitter and received no reply.
- CrackBerry Addict
06-01-2012, 02:18 PM #2
- 532 Posts
I think if you read what Alec has already said (many times), you'd find that there is a dedicated team at RIM which does go after "big name" apps.
Are you sure that these same companies weren't waiting for Cascades to be available rather than develop on Adobe Air SDK ?
I understand the need of many to have lots of specific apps, but I also find it quite presumptuous that people think that RIM is doing nothing about it.
I find it hard to believe that anyone within RIM doesn't understand that there are key apps which different people want. And that without those apps, there will always be people who will complain. I therefore believe that THEY ARE going after the big name apps.
- CrackBerry Genius
06-01-2012, 02:26 PM #3
- 2,728 Posts
I'm sure the development team at RIM is trying to to get people to develop for the BB platform, but they can only do so much. They can only show the positives of their platform and show make a sales pitch, but ultimately the companies decide.
OP, why don't you pose the same question to NYT and Ft? They need to know that there are customers willing to pay for a PlayBook app as well.Through the Years :2001 Ericsson T29s> Sony Z5> Sony Z7> SE Z600>Moto A760> RAZR V3>Razr V3i>BB 8800>BB 9500 >BB 9800>Bold 9900..RIM Returns with a bang
Life was much simpler when Apple and Blackberry were just fruits
Can't I ask the question of both? Why put my question off. If Alec says we went to NYT and they said no for reason XYZ then I've got my answer. Why can't I ask RIM to answer the question. More to the point why don't they answer the question?
If Alec says NYT is coming with Cascades I will shout Yahooooo! but if it is that they aren't doing cascadesd and won't even port their Android App over then that is a SERIOUS issue that RIM IMHO needs to be working on much harder than on Blackberry Jam - which I support.
I just want to know that RIM gets that they need these kinds of Apps and that they are working on getting them but I've heard nothing.
BB's were originally for corporate types, so how can RIM not have high-quality content from the sources I mentioned, especially the FT and throw in the WSJ for that matter.
My intent i not to bash RIM but it is really to find out what is going on. Frankly if the NYT and FT are not supporting BB10 I need to move on - very sadly.
- CrackBerry Abuser
06-01-2012, 04:16 PM #7
- 123 Posts
Why isn't WSJ available for the PlayBook? I would wager a guess that it's for the same reason it isn't available for WebOS or the ill-fated Kin, or some other obscure Android tablet selling in China. As hard as it is to swallow, the PlayBook is an irrelevant device, used by a handful of users (relatively), made by a company that looks like it is not going to exist a year from now.
- CrackBerry Abuser
06-01-2012, 04:17 PM #8
- 265 Posts
I agree rim needs the top business apps on board.
I have no idea what it takes to port an app over to playbook but from what I've read and heard its not difficult. if that is the case then these companies are lazy. If someone offered you a rent free store to display your wares why wouldn't you take it. Regardless of how much foot traffic or exposure the store has its free.
- CrackBerry Abuser
06-02-2012, 12:16 AM #9
- 333 Posts
I wrote to TD Canada Trust (another major Canadian bank) about creating an app for OS7. They have one for OS6. An IT person replied the next day, essentially saying that they were working on it, but it wasn't so simple. Instead, they gave me a link to their mobile website, which works great on my Torch and PlayBook. So I no longer care about an app.
It's similar with newspapers - I have Globe and Mail and National Post apps, but I prefer the websites. Apple has trained us to be app-obsessed, but do we really need an app for every website?