[ccbs]

I will certainly compare BB10 to the Windows phones available at that time. BB10 does not have to be at the Windows level, it it won't be for quite a while, but it does need to show some good potential. If BB10 is far below Windows at that time, I will strongly consider switching.

So the point is, Windows is the most dangerous competitor RIM has. Microsoft has a good cash flow from non-mobile business and a proven track record in the enterprise. They can sell to the same people and can easily outlast RIM.

Google has cash but it is not trusted in the enterprise--for good reasons.

Apple is a blip whose time will surely pass.

I don't know much about a blip but Apple has more cash than both Microsoft and Google and generate cash faster than Google and Microsoft combined. Your bias is clearly showing here. Apple, like it or hate it, has major in-road in emerging market like China and Brazil. Their growth is very stable and have a very good track record of growing their revenue. Most people in those markets are aspired to have Apple's product. Even in India, most wealthy people choose iPhone over Android and RIMM. If one thinks that a roll-out of BB10 can change that in a blip, one is definitely delusional. RIMM needs to come out with something that fundamentally change the smart phone scene not unlike what original iPhone did on 2007, to have a chance to challenge Apple and Android. In addition they will have to hope that Apple react the same way RIMM did on 2007 to have a chance to further gain back the market share they lost. It is no doubt a tall order and I am not optimistic that RIMM have a chance.

[YorkieRay]

The "iPhone 5" to which they referred was simply the "next" iPhone at the time, which turned out to be the 4S.

Just weeks before the launch last October, many informed in the tech press were expecting Apple to launch 2 phones, iPhone 4S and iPhone 5. There had been widespread speculation about the case style and the screen size of the new phone, this was not going to be just an updated iPhone 4. This smoke and mirrors approach seems to work very well for Apple, but isn't an option for everyone.
RIM needs to create a buzz about BB10 so that everyone is aware that this marks a new dawn for the company.

[Crucial_Xtreme]

I don't see this happening. I don't think Nokia can out-perform RIM. But that's just my opinion. Nokia has already released out of their "turn around" of the company. RIM's in the process. We have to wait and see how BBOS stack up against the competition before this can truly be considered. WinMo has grown but is still behind BBOS. Good target for them, but I don't see it happening.

[ccbs]

I don't see this happening. I don't think Nokia can out-perform RIM. But that's just my opinion. Nokia has already released out of their "turn around" of the company. RIM's in the process. We have to wait and see how BBOS stack up against the competition before this can truly be considered. WinMo has grown but is still behind BBOS. Good target for them, but I don't see it happening.

I see it the other way that Nokia should have an advantage as it started a year earlier than RIMM and has the backing of Microsoft. BBOS 10 will be a start over and needs to built user share from effectively zero. Nokia took the plunge a year earlier and have a foundation of WP7 platform and continuously building up the user base through WP8, which united desktop, tablet and phone OS and UI. Microsoft is now actively paying for user and developers to counter the apps deficiency. They will also soon launch a billion dollar marketing campaign on windows 8. Unfortunately for RIMM, the Win8 campaign will likely fall on the same time frame as BBOS 10. It goes without saying that Windows with its partner (intel, HP, DELL, NOKIA, Nvidia, Qualcomm, etc) will have a much larger ads campaign than RIMM can afford. For the OS being equal, Microsoft + NOKIA are very formidable competitor to be taken lightly.

[Economist101]

Just weeks before the launch last October, many informed in the tech press were expecting Apple to launch 2 phones, iPhone 4S and iPhone 5. There had been widespread speculation about the case style and the screen size of the new phone, this was not going to be just an updated iPhone 4.

And this would be the same press that reported the "iPad 3" would ditch its home button, right? How did that prediction turn out? There's a reason they're called "rumors."

[BlackBerry Guy]

See I disagree here completely

The consumer market is easily fickle enough to see either of these titans fall in a year to #3 spot,
If the malware scare that has it Macs this week with 600,000 Macs infected hit the iPhone you'd see a very sharp shift in how Businesses treat the BYOD market, which could bring RIM to a very strong 3rd place in a very short time, and the negative impact on Apple products would spin poorly in the media because Apple may be the media darling, the underdog turned titan and on it's way to be the first trillion dollar company, but media loves to start kicking on the way down, and Apple would get it's fair share of kicking.
Android runs the risk of key players deciding to drop them because of the battle to the bottom, HTC numbers are hurting as bad as RIM's numbers, Samsung has more than just Android to play with, and with ZTE getting into the Android game in North America slowly it could actually give a bad image to the brand.
Will RIM be around still for this to happen? will any of it ever happen?
Will a completely new player come out with a new technology that trumps all that are currently available? can't be said,
but it is close minded to think anyone is really safe in a commoditized market like smartphones have become

I see your point, but a few things to also consider:

If there was a malware problem that affected iPhones or Android devices, and the whole BYOD movement stops, 2 things will happen. You'll have a rush from IT departments to purchase BlackBerry devices, which would be good for RIM. But you'll still be leaving all these iPhones and Android handsets in the hands of their owners, most likely with time still left on their contracts. Those owners may decide to keep their phones (thus remaining active users), and may even bite the bullet when their contract expires and get the latest version of their preferred device, especially if they've invested in or are tied in heavily with the ecosystem (apps, services, accessories etc).

You're right, companies that rise, will eventually fall...it's just a matter of when, how, and how hard. Apple and Google are dominant right now in the smartphone market, like RIM was 4 years ago. They're not infalliable, but I still don't think any decline in their market share will occur in a period as quick as a year.

[_StephenBB81]

I see your point, but a few things to also consider:

If there was a malware problem that affected iPhones or Android devices, and the whole BYOD movement stops, 2 things will happen. You'll have a rush from IT departments to purchase BlackBerry devices, which would be good for RIM. But you'll still be leaving all these iPhones and Android handsets in the hands of their owners, most likely with time still left on their contracts. Those owners may decide to keep their phones (thus remaining active users), and may even bite the bullet when their contract expires and get the latest version of their preferred device, especially if they've invested in or are tied in heavily with the ecosystem (apps, services, accessories etc).

You're right, companies that rise, will eventually fall...it's just a matter of when, how, and how hard. Apple and Google are dominant right now in the smartphone market, like RIM was 4 years ago. They're not infalliable, but I still don't think any decline in their market share will occur in a period as quick as a year.

decline in user base and decline in market share are 2 very different things.

If every BYOD user who has 1 personal phone suddenly is told they must carry a company phone, they now have 2 phones, the user base of the BOYD phone remains unchange, but the Market share of that phone was just cut in half as the market double in size ( for simple math assuming the market is only BYOD owners etc etc..)

Also those users in a position of financial freedom as I'll call it if their device causes them losses, keeping the device poses a greater financial risk then replacing it, thus decreasing user base, AND decreasing market share.

Also in North America half of mobile phone subscriptions are NOT smartphones, which means that user base remaining constant everyones market share could be cut in half and another player could take the lead, the smartphone market place is still developing, and there are a lot of things that could happen.

I don't suspect we'll see Apple taken down from the top manufacturer in the near future, I can actually see Android falling first due to battling between Hardware makers, and eventual split offs

[sf49ers]

I see it the other way that Nokia should have an advantage as it started a year earlier than RIMM and has the backing of Microsoft. BBOS 10 will be a start over and needs to built user share from effectively zero. Nokia took the plunge a year earlier and have a foundation of WP7 platform and continuously building up the user base through WP8, which united desktop, tablet and phone OS and UI. Microsoft is now actively paying for user and developers to counter the apps deficiency. They will also soon launch a billion dollar marketing campaign on windows 8. Unfortunately for RIMM, the Win8 campaign will likely fall on the same time frame as BBOS 10. It goes without saying that Windows with its partner (intel, HP, DELL, NOKIA, Nvidia, Qualcomm, etc) will have a much larger ads campaign than RIMM can afford. For the OS being equal, Microsoft + NOKIA are very formidable competitor to be taken lightly.

I don't think RIM is sitting on the sidelines either, they have kick started their app campaign at the sametime as windows 7 and they are obviously seeing some success there with some big name game studios already porting their apps to the QNX platform, RIM is definitely throwing money at the developers and will continue to do so. RIM has some advantages which cannot be taken lightly - firstly they have a loyal fan base, secondly enterprise, and lastly the BB OS which plays really well at the entry level and in the emerging markets.

BB OS phone sales will dominate BB10, wp7 sales until sometime, the curves are the high volume sellers in the pre-paid and emerging markets. With or without BB10 RIM will still outsell wp7

[Blackberry_boffin]

I think we will need to wait another 6 months to a year with Windows Phone. It really has not been marketed much at all in the US, and I'm not just talking about advertising, but actual product availability. There have been very few Windows Phone models released in the US so far.

VZW only carries one Windows Phone, the HTC Trophy, which was released in June 2011. Sprint has the HTC Arrive, which was released in May 2011. The offerings at the big CDMA carriers are very limited.

If more devices are available, and these devices are advertised but fail to sell, then I expect to see more doom and gloom articles for Windows Phone.

Maybe but the other side of the coin is demand.
When the Iphone landed it was not everywhere, but months later the carriers with it saw subscriber numbers rise. That was one device on one OS. That analogy falls away on Windows Phone.
What Windows Phone has on it's side is: -
1) Several handset makers backing it. Nokia exclusively.
2) Microsoft is still plugging at it determinedly,
3) It is very stable and capable,
4) Windows 8 is set to throw a bit of focus onto it through tighter integration, which is one of iOS's forte.
We'll have to see.

[Laura Knotek]

Maybe but the other side of the coin is demand.
When the Iphone landed it was not everywhere, but months later the carriers with it saw subscriber numbers rise. That was one device on one OS. That analogy falls away on Windows Phone.
What Windows Phone has on it's side is: -
1) Several handset makers backing it. Nokia exclusively.
2) Microsoft is still plugging at it determinedly,
3) It is very stable and capable,
4) Windows 8 is set to throw a bit of focus onto it through tighter integration, which is one of iOS's forte.
We'll have to see.

You mentioned carriers. That makes me think of T-Mobile in particular. T-Mobile is bleeding subscribers, but it definitely needs BB10 and a high-end Windows Phone. It does not have the iPhone, although it does have a lot of Android devices.

I could see BlackBerry and Windows Phone both benefiting if T-Mobile does not get the iPhone. However, the current Windows Phones available on T-Mobile are low-end. Better Windows Phones and BB10 would both help T-Mobile stop the churn.

[kenshaw]

I don't think RIM is sitting on the sidelines either, they have kick started their app campaign at the sametime as windows 7 and they are obviously seeing some success there with some big name game studios already porting their apps to the QNX platform, RIM is definitely throwing money at the developers and will continue to do so. RIM has some advantages which cannot be taken lightly - firstly they have a loyal fan base, secondly enterprise, and lastly the BB OS which plays really well at the entry level and in the emerging markets.

BB OS phone sales will dominate BB10, wp7 sales until sometime, the curves are the high volume sellers in the pre-paid and emerging markets. With or without BB10 RIM will still outsell wp7

They may be attracting some developers, but WP7 already has the big ones, Netflix,Kindle and now Skype in beta form.

[sosumi11]

The point about Android that gets missed is that it not a cash cow for Google. Matter of fact I am not sure they even generate any real money from it. With the acquisition of Motorola they will 'change' the landscape of Android.

Google is on record downplaying the financial success of Android in the Oracle vs Google lawsuit in order to minimize damages. This is going to trial on April 16th and because of Google's deliberate refusal to pay for a Java license.

Shortly before Oracle filed its lawsuit, a Google engineer drafted an email saying Google needs to negotiate a license for Java.

Google investigated alternatives to Java for Android and concluded "they all suck," the email said. Google sought to prevent Oracle from using the email in its case.

If Oracle wins the lawsuit against Google and Apple wins their lawsuits against the hardware makers (Samsung, Motorola and HTC), Android will no longer be a free product from Google and the prices for Android powered devices will skyrocket as Google will no doubt pass on the costs to their "partners."

Microsoft, on the other hand, just has to sit on the sidelines.

[Laura Knotek]

Google is on record downplaying the financial success of Android in the Oracle vs Google lawsuit in order to minimize damages. This is going to trial on April 16th and because of Google's deliberate refusal to pay for a Java license.



If Oracle wins the lawsuit against Google and Apple wins their lawsuits against the hardware makers (Samsung, Motorola and HTC), Android will no longer be a free product from Google and the prices for Android powered devices will skyrocket as Google will no doubt pass on the costs to their "partners."

Microsoft, on the other hand, just has to sit on the sidelines.

Sounds like Oracle bought Sun just to be a patent troll. I wonder why Google didn't buy Sun.

[sosumi11]

Sounds like Oracle bought Sun just to be a patent troll. I wonder why Google didn't buy Sun.

Apparently you weren't the only one that brought this question up...

The worst decision Google ever made.

... now that Oracle owns the patents and copyrights related to Java (a technology originally created by Sun), they have gone after Google with a greedy vengeance, chasing the revenue potential to be found in Google’s use of Java in Android. With the real possibility that Oracle could win billions, both in terms of immediate penalties and from ongoing fees derived from the growing success of the Android platform, $7.4 billion would have been a bargain for Google.

Oracle’s push to derive revenue from Android isn’t the only reason Google should have bought Sun. Rather, it was a strategic error that deprives Google of a standard software development platform at a time when the platform landscape is in flux, shaken in recent years by a device revolution that has driven Apple - and Android - to new heights.

Oracle bought Sun primarily for the MySQL database.

[Laura Knotek]

Apparently you weren't the only one that brought this question up...

The worst decision Google ever made.

I am also curious how this will affect Android and its plan to re-merge into Linux. Android and Linux re-merge into one operating system | ZDNet

[Real Estate Appraiser]

I don't think a windows phone will knock off RIM. I can only speak on behalf of myself, but I simply don't want windows on my phone. It is boring and too much like the computer I spend half my life on.

But I guess for some its the hardware that sells the phone not the OS, so who knows. Having said that, the Lumia at first glance doesn't look that impressive.

[Laura Knotek]

I don't think a windows phone will knock off RIM. I can only speak on behalf of myself, but I simply don't want windows on my phone. It is boring and too much like the computer I spend half my life on.

But I guess for some its the hardware that sells the phone not the OS, so who knows. Having said that, the Lumia at first glance doesn't look that impressive.

My main interest in the Nokia Lumia 900 is the fact that it is LTE-capable. AT&T is rolling out LTE by summer in my city. The only other LTE-capable devices beside Windows Phone (Nokia Lumia 900 or HTC Titan II) are Android devices. I do not care for Android, but I want something that is LTE-capable. Therefore, Windows Phone is my only other option at this time.

[ody360]

Well MS got to me... I was planning on saving up for a new smartphone, and originally I was planning on a BB to go with my PB, but the windows challenge arrived and now I have a new HTC Titan at the cost of my 5 year old Nokia E71...

The wp interface is different and a breath of fresh air from ios and android, but like my pb, it lacks in the app department. Of course MS solution is to buy out developers, so overall, I'm excited with my new phone...

Now if RIM were to come out with a similar challenge and/or BB10 phones come out with a unique, sleek, interface, I may end up selling my free HTC Titan and pick up a new BB. We'll wait and see.

[sf49ers]

They may be attracting some developers, but WP7 already has the big ones, Netflix,Kindle and now Skype in beta form.

RIM is far better off with BB10 because the direction they took is the right one, going with open source community focus dev tools and technologies i.e officially supporting native and HTML5. Strangely Microsoft doesn't support native development in Wp7 and as a result you won't see big name developer games like Dead Space etc being ported easily unless MSFT pays a bounty full of money to the developer for their dev costs. The official development technology they support is their own called C#(C sharp) and even their web browser (IE 9) is not web-kit based (a open source framework which Apple, RIM and Google are using). The pace of innovation happening on open source technologies in general is far greater and in order to keep up with it Msft has to either throw lots and lots amounts of money or increase the mind share which is not happening since WP7 debut. IMO RIM is going the right direction and Netflix, Kindle will soon follow suite once BB10 hits the market.

[apengue1]

You make some good points there. From what I can see, MS sees itself as a powerhouse. Their goal is to get Windows 8 out and they expect it to sell really well, which would give devs no choice but to develop for their platform. Fortunately, this hasn't happened yet, but they are definitely currently paying the big bucks for some big name apps.


Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

[soren203]

I really dont like windows phone

[Morty2264]

I may just be anti-conflict on this, but why must Nokia - or any other smartphone brand - "beat out" another brand? I understand the facet of capitalism and the economic side of the debate - I'm just speaking from a different perspective. Why can't these brands just exist, generate an audience and capital, and not "set out" to "eat the shares" of other companies? Google and Apple are (in my opinion) two examples. Both are great companies with good marketing schemes. I'm fairly confident that they could hold up their own and not need to try and beat out the other in order to generate more capital or revenues. Again, I'm not exactly coming at this from a business standpoint... Just a more concerned one. RIM doesn't need to be "bought out" or anything like that... I admit they must do some catch-up; but these sources [might be] forgetting that BB10 is set to hit stores in the fall or so, and BlackBerry sales and capital might improve due to these upgrades. What if some phone users (who don't own smartphones) see a new BB10 sign and want to try it out? Either way, I find this article interesting but a bit dramatic.

[palomartian]

We already know what BB10 or whatever they call it when it's out will look like. PB OS. Big hairy deal. How is that a game changer? The more likely scenario is a year after release RIM is out of the handset business.

[hameedazar]

so if qnx is the new priority for bb,then will bb abandonthe other bb os's? considering bb os and qnx are different #ia

Maybe but the other side of the coin is demand.

When the Iphone landed it was not everywhere, but months later the carriers with it saw subscriber numbers rise. That was one device on one OS. That analogy falls away on Windows Phone.

What Windows Phone has on it's side is: -

1) Several handset makers backing it. Nokia exclusively.

2) Microsoft is still plugging at it determinedly,

3) It is very stable and capable,

4) Windows 8 is set to throw a bit of focus onto it through tighter integration, which is one of iOS's forte.

We'll have to see.

Sent from my BlackBerry 8520 using Tapatalk

[sosumi11]

I may just be anti-conflict on this, but why must Nokia - or any other smartphone brand - "beat out" another brand? I understand the facet of capitalism and the economic side of the debate - I'm just speaking from a different perspective. Why can't these brands just exist, generate an audience and capital, and not "set out" to "eat the shares" of other companies? Google and Apple are (in my opinion) two examples. Both are great companies with good marketing schemes. I'm fairly confident that they could hold up their own and not need to try and beat out the other in order to generate more capital or revenues. Again, I'm not exactly coming at this from a business standpoint... Just a more concerned one. RIM doesn't need to be "bought out" or anything like that... I admit they must do some catch-up; but these sources [might be] forgetting that BB10 is set to hit stores in the fall or so, and BlackBerry sales and capital might improve due to these upgrades. What if some phone users (who don't own smartphones) see a new BB10 sign and want to try it out? Either way, I find this article interesting but a bit dramatic.

Your suggestion is like saying "Why must the New York Yankees beat out every other team?"

In the case of professional sports, it is the responsibility of the owners to build a winning team. Not an almost winner.

This basic comparison is the same in business and especially in the Tech Industry. Not one company on the earth wants to dream of becoming a commodity manufacturer. Unless they dominate that industry like Nokia once did and Proctor and Gamble does in several others (by making multiple brands). General Motors used the same model as well.

In the battle of any form of ecosystems, there can only be one real winner. The PC Wars ended with one winner and one alternative. And that alternative barely survived despite having 3% of a very big pie. It's about compatibility.

Consumers expect one dominant force to win. And the others are just "alternatives".