Does RIM use interns to develop the OS?

[jetman1287]

.685:

- Phone application does not work.
- Camera does not work.
- Media player encountering many issues.


How did this leak come about? They couldn't POSSIBLY have meant to push this for carrier testing, right? How do they even slap a number on this and call it a build? This is the kind of stuff you see in the earliest stages of development.

This is freaking hysterical...can't believe this company was once known for "quality"

[GlitchZero]

Yes, because interns are so inept. They're usually better and more efficient at their job than the people who actually work for the company. (trust someone who IS an intern.)

Learn some respect.

And it's the Storm. If you don't like it, downgrade your OS. Use a hybrid. Solve the damn problem.

[jetman1287]

Originally Posted by GlitchZero

Yes, because interns are so inept. They're usually better and more efficient at their job than the people who actually work for the company. (trust someone who IS an intern.)

Learn some respect.

And it's the Storm. If you don't like it, downgrade your OS. Use a hybrid. Solve the damn problem.

Isn't it THEIR job to fix the problem?

I actually do respect interns, my title implies that interns only are creating the OS.

[JasonM.]

To be completely honest, I'd say they've moved all their talent into developing 6 and the new storm 3 UI engine rather than have them fix bugs on 5. They're just letting the pee-on's bug fix their old code (and make more of a mess of it in the process).

[BBThemes]

Originally Posted by jetman1287

.685:

- Phone application does not work.
- Camera does not work.
- Media player encountering many issues.


How did this leak come about? They couldn't POSSIBLY have meant to push this for carrier testing, right? How do they even slap a number on this and call it a build? This is the kind of stuff you see in the earliest stages of development.

This is freaking hysterical...can't believe this company was once known for "quality"

so your complaining because a leak - NOT something offical - doesnt work right?

all devs make beta builds, and not everything works in particluar versions, hence beta/leak. they didnt mean for you to use it, so theres nothing left to say

[JasonM.]

Originally Posted by daveastra

so your complaining because a leak - NOT something offical - doesnt work right?

all devs make beta builds, and not everything works in particluar versions, hence beta/leak. they didnt mean for you to use it, so theres nothing left to say

This logic has plagued me since I started using a BB... Between the lack of milestone builds and internal testing, how is a build certified and installed on a device? Is it really up to the carriers to deem a build worthy? By that logic, an auto maker should just build a bunch of different engines for cars and keep shipping them to the dealerships. When they've tested one that performs the way they think it should they install it in the car and call it a day. RIM has potentially the worst software building model I've ever seen in the industry.

[jetman1287]

Originally Posted by daveastra

so your complaining because a leak - NOT something offical - doesnt work right?

all devs make beta builds, and not everything works in particluar versions, hence beta/leak. they didnt mean for you to use it, so theres nothing left to say

But how did this get out if it was not on the carrier website for testing. How could it be posted?! And why even make this a build...every single minor change doesn't give it a new build number, they are compiled with radio and platform and everything. Why even call it .685 and not say, internally, .684.5?

[D_March]

How many threads are you going to create for this? By the way, the Jets suck.

[jetman1287]

Originally Posted by D_March

How many threads are you going to create for this? By the way, the Jets suck.

The only real threads I create that whine have been...one about 5.0...one about this build after my phone stopped working today and I couldn't make any calls...one after VZW forced $10 data plans on everyone...

Don't see what's so out of line with 3 whiny threads in a year?

[Thanontos]

That's way too many.....jk

It is sad though to think that .685 may have leaked from carrier testing. Some people think that the Chinese 9530 is built differently than ours, but I don't think from a business standpoint that would be a good decision. They have to have a good amount of S1's left over anyway plus the cost of developing OS's for two different versions of the 9530 would draw more man hours away from OS6 or future devices and such. I agree with jason though and think that more of the senior members are working on OS6

[BBThemes]

Originally Posted by jetman1287

But how did this get out if it was not on the carrier website for testing. How could it be posted?! And why even make this a build...every single minor change doesn't give it a new build number, they are compiled with radio and platform and everything. Why even call it .685 and not say, internally, .684.5?

when a build is exported to be tested, its given a number, hence the build, this happens with virtually all software, just you dont see it (take apple as perfect example, 3.1.2 to 4.0, but that wasnt one step), RIM export their builds, then (i think) sometimes place them on their tester sites, think its called alliance or summat, cant remember but i have a login to one lol, from being on that site you can then download the OS to test it, its NOT commercially available, and isnt meant to be so. and for your 684.5 idea, why not just play with single numbers, thers way too many periods as it is!!

they have to export and test it as otherwise they wont know what the issues are, and as with any prgram sometimes by fixing one thing you break summat else. it happens. alot.

but my point still remains, you cannot seriously complain about the quality of a build that was never deemed ok for public use.

[rlmesq]

Originally Posted by JasonM.

By that logic, an auto maker should just build a bunch of different engines for cars and keep shipping them to the dealerships. When they've tested one that performs the way they think it should they install it in the car and call it a day. RIM has potentially the worst software building model I've ever seen in the industry.

Analogy is fail.

1. A car engine is hardware, which is expensive to replace. Software changes are cheap to implement. How often do you get updates to your computer operating system? Your browser? Would you prefer that Microsoft and Mozilla never roll out updates or bug fixes?
2. Lifespan to obsolescence is much longer on a car than a mobile device.
3. Auto makers often implement minor changes during a model year.
4. Major changes usually occur at a new model year, but manufacturers do not make drastic changes every year, as they did 1950-1970.
5. Cars can be recalled if a defect is serious enough.

The Storm 1 is better compared to a car platform that might go as long as four years without any drastic changes. Incremental software upgrades are similar to changes between model years... but, unlike swapping a car engine, they can easily push new software to your phone.

Oh, yeah.... S1 is also obsolete. It has neither the processing power nor the memory capacity to run the upcoming OS.

To continue with the car analogy... OP was complaining that a Chinese software beta didn't work right on his US phone. That's like importing a Toyota directly from Japan instead of buying a US version, then complaining that the steering wheel is on the wrong side.

[JasonM.]

Originally Posted by rlmesq

Analogy is fail.

1. A car engine is hardware, which is expensive to replace. Software changes are cheap to implement. How often do you get updates to your computer operating system? Your browser? Would you prefer that Microsoft and Mozilla never roll out updates or bug fixes?
2. Lifespan to obsolescence is much longer on a car than a mobile device.
3. Auto makers often implement minor changes during a model year.
4. Major changes usually occur at a new model year, but manufacturers do not make drastic changes every year, as they did 1950-1970.
5. Cars can be recalled if a defect is serious enough.

The Storm 1 is better compared to a car platform that might go as long as four years without any drastic changes. Incremental software upgrades are similar to changes between model years... but, unlike swapping a car engine, they can easily push new software to your phone.

Oh, yeah.... S1 is also obsolete. It has neither the processing power nor the memory capacity to run the upcoming OS.

To continue with the car analogy... OP was complaining that a Chinese software beta didn't work right on his US phone. That's like importing a Toyota directly from Japan instead of buying a US version, then complaining that the steering wheel is on the wrong side.

Leave it to a lawyer... I'm going to take your final point and say that even using the platform from .685 is a gigantic fail. I apologize for your complete overanalyzation of my very simple analogy. Lets replace the engine in my analogy with PCM code. Now have the dealers flash the PCM code for a year and a half and still have the car running sub par.

Also, if S1 is obsolete to be running 5.0.X, why is it still being developed? Your internet swagger might exude intelligence, but does it really make you feel better that you tore apart a [b][/b][b][/b][b][/b][b][/b]ty analogy?

[GlitchZero]

The S1 has been EOLed by almost every carrier, so he was very correct in saying it's obsolete. The 8330 was being developed for until almost the S2's release, but it was obsolete long before that.

It's being developed because there's like 2 carriers that are still asking for OS', and people (for some reason) still own them.

[JasonM.]

Originally Posted by GlitchZero

The S1 has been EOLed by almost every carrier, so he was very correct in saying it's obsolete. The 8330 was being developed for until almost the S2's release, but it was obsolete long before that.

S1 and S2 are on the same development cycle with regard to OS5. S1 was EOL'd because it had a replacement 1 year after it's launch. Anyone that would buy a S1 while the S2 was available was a fool. The 8330, like the S1, was being developed for because it was on the same dev cycle as the 8350. EOL'd != obsolete.

Originally Posted by GlitchZero

It's being developed because there's like 2 carriers that are still asking for OS', and people (for some reason) still own them.

Stating that 2 carriers are still asking for OS's and people still own them further affirms that the product is not obsolete. I would think that since it is just being offered in an Eastern Asia market, it is hardly going to be buried. People "for some reason," are still in contract with the devices so they are likely to ride it out until something else comes along. Street value of a S1 doesn't make it an appealing sell...