[ext]

I don't understand, why is RIM going for BB OS 7 and not jump right into QNX powered smartphones?

The stock price is tanking, their portfolio of yet-to-be-released products like the touch bold already seem dated....I can't imagine the frustration investors of large holdings would have with management.

Are consumers even excited about QNX? Seems like a great OS, but a great OS isn't enough these days, the OS needs APPS, and that is the exact reason why a lot of people returned their PlayBook, because of very little app selection.

Come on RIM, get on QNX already, and let's see how that even goes - because quite frankly, i'm not excited for QNX.

If you're wondering about me, I have a BlackBerry Tour (yup, i love the keyboard + bbm) & a iPhone 4 (for the apps)!

[_StephenBB81]

RIM probably doesn't use QNX for it's phones right now for a few possible reasons

Let me speculate:

Lack of Radio stack:
Without a radio stack RIM couldn't connect to cell towers
Lack of PIM for QNX:
If they had PIM for QNX it would be on the playbook, can't very well release a phone without a PIM,
Lack of security certifications:
They need to have these in place to move into government installation bases.
Hardware limitations:
The Playbook runs on a dual core platform. RIM is still developing on single core hardware
I am sure it is cost probibative for RIM to move to dualcore phone devices and retain their desired and required battery life,

Those are just a few of my theories

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[twigg]

It's simply not ready. Do you really think that if RIM can't even get OS 7 ready (aka 6.1) in a reasonable time frame that they can QNX ready?

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[sam_b77]

RIM probably doesn't use QNX for it's phones right now for a few possible reasons

Let me speculate:

Lack of Radio stack:
Without a radio stack RIM couldn't connect to cell towers
Lack of PIM for QNX:
If they had PIM for QNX it would be on the playbook, can't very well release a phone without a PIM,
Lack of security certifications:
They need to have these in place to move into government installation bases.
Hardware limitations:
The Playbook runs on a dual core platform. RIM is still developing on single core hardware
I am sure it is cost probibative for RIM to move to dualcore phone devices and retain their desired and required battery life,

Those are just a few of my theories

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Good point.
I'm sure this is what is holding RIM back from the consumer space.
The security certificates come first for RIM due to their Corporate and Govt. customers. They can't simply pop in a brand new OS on their devices, switch the NOCs to communicate with those devices without assuring the Enterprise customers that the security is rock solid.

[stackberry369]

Then why not make a special type of bb for government workers and one for consumers?

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[BlackBerry.est08]

Then why not make a special type of bb for government workers and one for consumers?

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

RIM is already slow at making devices with one OS, you think they can really handle creating two different lines?

[BBThemes]

RIM only seem slow at putting out devices because they are so disorganised. look at it this way, they have the 9650 and 9780, both are bolds, both runs OS6 just one is cdma and one is gsm. but they have 2 hardware configs, if they had one hardware setup with a gsm/cdma dual chip then thats just one phone to produce, not two. apply the same logic to the pearl 9105 and 9100 too, too much waste going on, plus having the torch as an exclusive (in the USA at least) and the style as cdma only isnt helping them.
they got it right with the storm (and now the 9900/9930 also) as they are externally the same hardware for cdma and gsm versions, so you can buy more at less cost thus keeping the economies of scale tight. its how apple gets it done so well if we`re honest.

RIM should have this as their phone range for QNX:
curve - gsm+cdma variant in same identical casings - qwerty only
bold (touch) - gsm+cdma in same identical casings - qwerty + touch
touch (aka torch touch) - gsm+cdma in same identical casings - touch only

and thats the lineup. the torch slider lineup is made redundant by the bold touch (and if your gonna say you have it closed most of the time, get the touch), the pearl never really came back from the history it held with the 81xx series, and the style is on one network, so a waste of efforts in the sense that they could do more concentrating on their `core` of 3 phones (no offense to any style owners of course).

this would also only give them just 3 different screen dimensions, which would make life lovely for developers too, thus making the platform more attractive.

imo thats how they should move forward as it would provide the most streamlined setup, which would mean faster excecution on products and only 3 screen sizes for OS development and it would make bulk compnent purchase cheaper therefore lowering the cost and improving profit margins.

as for why no QNX phones, derusset hit the nail on the head, until they have FIPS and such certifications it wont be close to happening, however from a radio stack point of view thats being sorted in the cellular playbooks so it`ll be ready to roll from that front id imagine.

[_StephenBB81]

RIM only seem slow at putting out devices because they are so disorganised. look at it this way, they have the 9650 and 9780, both are bolds, both runs OS6 just one is cdma and one is gsm. but they have 2 hardware configs, if they had one hardware setup with a gsm/cdma dual chip then thats just one phone to produce, not two. apply the same logic to the pearl 9105 and 9100 too, too much waste going on, plus having the torch as an exclusive (in the USA at least) and the style as cdma only isnt helping them.
they got it right with the storm (and now the 9900/9930 also) as they are externally the same hardware for cdma and gsm versions, so you can buy more at less cost thus keeping the economies of scale tight. its how apple gets it done so well if we`re honest.

RIM should have this as their phone range for QNX:
curve - gsm+cdma variant in same identical casings - qwerty only
bold (touch) - gsm+cdma in same identical casings - qwerty + touch
touch (aka torch touch) - gsm+cdma in same identical casings - touch only

and thats the lineup. the torch slider lineup is made redundant by the bold touch (and if your gonna say you have it closed most of the time, get the touch), the pearl never really came back from the history it held with the 81xx series, and the style is on one network, so a waste of efforts in the sense that they could do more concentrating on their `core` of 3 phones (no offense to any style owners of course).

this would also only give them just 3 different screen dimensions, which would make life lovely for developers too, thus making the platform more attractive.

imo thats how they should move forward as it would provide the most streamlined setup, which would mean faster excecution on products and only 3 screen sizes for OS development and it would make bulk compnent purchase cheaper therefore lowering the cost and improving profit margins.

as for why no QNX phones, derusset hit the nail on the head, until they have FIPS and such certifications it wont be close to happening, however from a radio stack point of view thats being sorted in the cellular playbooks so it`ll be ready to roll from that front id imagine.

I VERY much disagree with your Hardware limitations (except I like the curve no touch screen, qwerty, and the bold touch screen qwerty)'


I feel RIM should have
Curve/Style QWERTY devices, Hardware shared between them, form factor different
Bold QWERTY+Touch Device, Hardware same as Premium Touch screen devices
Torch QWERTY slider + touch device, Shared screen with touch screen phones
Volt? Touch only device
Pearl Mini qwerty device

The Bolds+ Curves etc would all share the same screen resolution to make it easier for theme developers, they would have similar hardware features, possibly different clock speeds, but an App developed for a Curve would run on a bold!

Larger screen devices like the torch and volt would share the same screen resolution and much of the same hardware again for ease of app development

Once the EASE of app development comes into play with QNX on the phones, RIM needs to make it easier for multiple device development without restricting users from the form factor diversity that RIM brings

[Deathcommand]

It really isn't as easy as it seems. Plus, they probably had a buttload of R&D in the 9900 already. might as well push those first.

[BBThemes]

I VERY much disagree with your Hardware limitations (except I like the curve no touch screen, qwerty, and the bold touch screen qwerty)'


I feel RIM should have
Curve/Style QWERTY devices, Hardware shared between them, form factor different
Bold QWERTY+Touch Device, Hardware same as Premium Touch screen devices
Torch QWERTY slider + touch device, Shared screen with touch screen phones
Volt? Touch only device
Pearl Mini qwerty device

The Bolds+ Curves etc would all share the same screen resolution to make it easier for theme developers, they would have similar hardware features, possibly different clock speeds, but an App developed for a Curve would run on a bold!

Larger screen devices like the torch and volt would share the same screen resolution and much of the same hardware again for ease of app development

Once the EASE of app development comes into play with QNX on the phones, RIM needs to make it easier for multiple device development without restricting users from the form factor diversity that RIM brings

i guess my point isnt so much the limitation of only a few phones, but having the equivalent phone in different hardware is stupid, the 9650 and 9780 why? wouldnt it be lots cheaper (think r+d, testing, parts) if they both were identical? RIM think so, hence the 9900 and 9930 being externally the same device, also can be said of storm, storm2 and 85xx and 93xx devices, thats how apple buys millions of screens at a dirt cheap price, in part due to sales and stuff, but by having the gsm and cdma iphone4 identical it costs them far far less.

the style is a waste, putting it on one network (which isnt even the biggest in that country) in the world is silly, if the style was in gsm and on at+t and gsm carriers around the world id bet theyd sell loads, but all that effort into a phone for one network just seems not the best use of their resources.

also having different processor clock speeds in essentially the same hardware is more a PC idea than a phone idea nowadays and while i guess the hardware might be capable of running it, you`d have that feeling that its never running 100% if you have the faster phone when its made for the slower one.

[Xopher]

My understanding of the 9630/9000 split was because AT&T had exclusivity on the Bold name. RIM still needed to replace the outdated 8830WE, so they came out with a similar model that didn't interfere with their contract. The Tour was named as such. When the 9700 came out, replacing the 9000, they kept the name, even though it looked more like the Tour. Naming the 9650 a Bold was an attempt to bring the split lines back together.

Exclusivity deals really caused a lot of the problems in the recent lineup. Bold, Storm, and Torch all caused BlackBerry to splinter just to please carriers.

I still believe that having multiple devices is good for business. The Pearl is a popular consumer device. Some swear that the Curve keyboard is still the best. The Storm (or whatever they call the next model) still could be a good model. The Bold is a great high-end device, and the Torch is a nice compromise for larger screen with full keyboard.

I really think they should keep those five form factors, but get rid of the exclusivity deals. It would be so much easier to keep track of things if they were uniform across all carriers, and much easier for application development.

[sam_b77]

RIM only seem slow at putting out devices because they are so disorganised. look at it this way, they have the 9650 and 9780, both are bolds, both runs OS6 just one is cdma and one is gsm. but they have 2 hardware configs, if they had one hardware setup with a gsm/cdma dual chip then thats just one phone to produce, not two. apply the same logic to the pearl 9105 and 9100 too, too much waste going on, plus having the torch as an exclusive (in the USA at least) and the style as cdma only isnt helping them.
they got it right with the storm (and now the 9900/9930 also) as they are externally the same hardware for cdma and gsm versions, so you can buy more at less cost thus keeping the economies of scale tight. its how apple gets it done so well if we`re honest.

RIM should have this as their phone range for QNX:
curve - gsm+cdma variant in same identical casings - qwerty only
bold (touch) - gsm+cdma in same identical casings - qwerty + touch
touch (aka torch touch) - gsm+cdma in same identical casings - touch only

and thats the lineup. the torch slider lineup is made redundant by the bold touch (and if your gonna say you have it closed most of the time, get the touch), the pearl never really came back from the history it held with the 81xx series, and the style is on one network, so a waste of efforts in the sense that they could do more concentrating on their `core` of 3 phones (no offense to any style owners of course).

this would also only give them just 3 different screen dimensions, which would make life lovely for developers too, thus making the platform more attractive.

imo thats how they should move forward as it would provide the most streamlined setup, which would mean faster excecution on products and only 3 screen sizes for OS development and it would make bulk compnent purchase cheaper therefore lowering the cost and improving profit margins.

as for why no QNX phones, derusset hit the nail on the head, until they have FIPS and such certifications it wont be close to happening, however from a radio stack point of view thats being sorted in the cellular playbooks so it`ll be ready to roll from that front id imagine.

I always slide up for the keyboard. I only use the virtual keyboard for address book functions.
By your logic I should get the Bold Touch. But I also like the Torch's Big Screen for browsing purposes.
No what do you suggest I should do? If I buy the Touch for the screen, then I have to use the virtual keyboard, which is cumbersome at best and impossible while driving, and if I buy the Bold Touch then I get half the screen.
So if you look at it my way, then the Torch design is best of both worlds.
And I'm sure there are many who want the same things as I do.

[Skeevecr]

I feel RIM should have
Curve/Style QWERTY devices, Hardware shared between them, form factor different
Bold QWERTY+Touch Device, Hardware same as Premium Touch screen devices
Torch QWERTY slider + touch device, Shared screen with touch screen phones
Volt? Touch only device
Pearl Mini qwerty device

I think these days we will see a core of curve, bold, torch and an all-touch model, the Pearl's original purpose was to ease the transition from candybar feature phones and these days that transition is more likely to be to a curve model whether it's an ordinary one or that all touch one that showed up in some of those roadmap slides so we may have seen the last of the Pearl.

Stuff like the Style fills a role of them trying out a new form factor based on a big enough order from a single carrier, some like the Torch will then make the step up to the core range, but others may be one and done. Perhaps we will see a landscape slider as the next form factor they try out.

The Bolds+ Curves etc would all share the same screen resolution to make it easier for theme developers, they would have similar hardware features, possibly different clock speeds, but an App developed for a Curve would run on a bold!

Larger screen devices like the torch and volt would share the same screen resolution and much of the same hardware again for ease of app development

The issue with the Bold and the Curve having the same resolution is that out of the two of them the Curve is more likely to have the smaller screen and it would seem odd to have the higher pixel density screen on a budget model.

I would expect that their plan will be to keep the torch and bold on the same resolution, storm on a widescreen version of that and the curve will get the resolution of the previous years Bold.

[Skeevecr]

the style is a waste, putting it on one network (which isnt even the biggest in that country) in the world is silly, if the style was in gsm and on at+t and gsm carriers around the world id bet theyd sell loads, but all that effort into a phone for one network just seems not the best use of their resources.

The style's form factor simply hasn't been popular outside north america for a long time so a gsm model probably wouldn't have sold that well actually and as far as it being a waste to only be on sprint, rim wouldn't have gone ahead with making it without a certain order level from them that would make it cost effective for them.

[ADGrant]

It's simply not ready. Do you really think that if RIM can't even get OS 7 ready (aka 6.1) in a reasonable time frame that they can QNX ready?

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

QNX isn't even ready on the PB.