[KAM1138]

The ROI for Android's and iOS' OS development is achieved through the sale of content and/or from targeted advertising.

Both enjoy captive audiences anchored to their respective ecosystems.

This is why BB10 never had a chance. There isn't much margin in hardware alone - unless you can spread expenses over a massively insane number of units like Samsung or Apple.

Another way to look at this is that you're Acknowledging that no one (not Apple or Android) are making money on the OS (licensing it), so...then why is Blackberry's failure to license it (as is being discussed now, and pointed to in the past as an issue) the factor in condemning BB10?

Companies (apparently) don't make money on the OS...so how can anyone blame the OS for a company's failure? Even if the plan was to make money on the OS, that's apparently a horrible plan--again NOT because of any inherent issue with the OS itself.

I think it's long past time that everyone apologize to BB10, and admit that it was great. (That's a joke, BB10 is dead, and can't hear your apology).

[conite]

Well, that's now. TODAY they have a "Captive Audience anchored to their respective ecosystems." I think you're 100% correct about that--but that's the RESULT.
Android and Apple didn't have a lock on Audiences in 2007. How many people ever heard of Android in 2007. There was no Predestined success--the result is based on the choices/execution of these companies plans.

The iphone changed the game--and some companies read that right and developed a plan that worked and others didn't. Or other factors just didn't work out for them.

Apple and Google ended up with "captive audiences" because they won--beating Blackberry's business plans with their own. None of this was predestined or written in stone. It was the result of better planning and execution.
I don't understand why people insist on taking hindsight too far--transforming it into a retroactive prediction saying "it was always impossible" rather than simply saying "Blackberry/RIM failed."

What has never made sense to me is that people point to BB10 itself as if that was a cause or a technological failure. That's just not correct. Not saying BB10 is PERFECTION, but it's like blaming A Bishop for losing a Chess Game. NO--the PLAYER is to blame, not the pieces.

BB10 was brought to market 5 years too late. The ecosystems were fully and deeply entrenched by 2010.

[bb10adopter111]

I suppose one could make a BB10-light to just provide email, SMS, and a simple browser.

But we'd still be talking about many 10s of millions.

The. ONLY point of such an exercise would be to make a minimalist phone. Once you start to add features and apps, the cost and complexity increase exponentially.

Whether there is a market for a phone with fewer apps than a stock BB10 phone in 2013 and no app store at all is obviously the primary question, but you'd definitely want to avoid the slippery slope of adding apps and features.



Posted with my trusty Z10

[conite]

Another way to look at this is that you're Acknowledging that no one (not Apple or Android) are making money on the OS (licensing it), so...then why is Blackberry's failure to license it (as is being discussed now, and pointed to in the past as an issue) the factor in condemning BB10?

Who's "condemning" BB10. It's just a lousy, unworkable business model.

[KAM1138]

BB10 was brought to market 5 years too late. The ecosystems were fully and deeply entrenched by 2010.

Ok, assuming that 2010 was the drop dead date...changes nothing about my views.

The Piece (BB10) still isn't the cause, of the Players (BlackBerry/RIMs) failure--Blackberry's failure just came even earlier or took too long to develop their OS.

For the record--I'm still not convinced that the "captive audience" that believes that they need "There's an app for that" was the only possible conclusion. It IS the conclusion, but I just don't think that was inevitable.

A lot of cross-talk about enterprise needs and that certain people need Specialized Apps (I'm sure they do). I'm just not convinced that this applied to the entire market is an organic fact, and not the result of other companies Marketing (That succeeded).

I think there is probably still some segment of mobile consumers (or perhaps even specialty customer bases--like government) that do not really need what Google and Apple have convinced them they do. Again--I think a lot of that "want" is the result of successful marketing and business plans.
Now, is this a smaller portion of the entire market--I'd say that's very likely.

Bottom line--Apple and Google CREATED the market that they are entrenched in--because they succeeded in creating that via their marketing--largely.

I'm basing this on the information I've read about what apps and functions Mobile users actually use, and it's quite limited. OF course, I read that information a while back (maybe a year or so?). I'm guessing that hasn't changed too much, but perhaps.

[KAM1138]

Who's "condemning" BB10. It's just a lousy, unworkable business model.

Well, anyone who has talked about BB10 being a "failure" or a "liability". I don't know if I can recall you specifically talking about the OS itself sucking. In fact--I think I recall you saying at some point that you actually really liked it (before moving to Android).

Yes, Blackberry had a lousy, and subsequently failed business model. My point is that BB10 isn't the cause of that failure, it is a "victim" as it were.

[KAM1138]

The. ONLY point of such an exercise would be to make a minimalist phone. Once you start to add features and apps, the cost and complexity increase exponentially.

Whether there is a market for a phone with fewer apps than a stock BB10 phone in 2013 and no app store at all is obviously the primary question, but you'd definitely want to avoid the slippery slope of adding apps and features.



Posted with my trusty Z10

I think a Phone that literally does nothing but Voice Calls/SMS and E-mail would have extremely limited appeal. I would have no use for it myself.
I WOULD have use for "Stock" BB10 features and functions, without third party (or any user downloadable) apps.

A device that is focused on communications AND provides functions common to all phones (camera, Calendar, basic utilities, and PDA functions). That's what I'd like.

Everyone has a different line I suppose, and personally mine is at "third party" (non-Core) apps.

[conite]

For the record--I'm still not convinced that the "captive audience" that believes that they need "There's an app for that" was the only possible conclusion. It IS the conclusion, but I just don't think that was inevitable.

A lot of cross-talk about enterprise needs and that certain people need Specialized Apps (I'm sure they do). I'm just not convinced that this is an organic fact, and not the result of other companies Marketing (That succeeded).

Ok, what about BlackBerry then?

Did they convince people of the need for apps? Beyond the BlackBerry UEM client, they have huge suites of enterprise apps - Good/BlackBerry Dynamics, Workspaces, SecureSuite, Work, BBM Enterprise, Access, and on and on and on. BlackBerry UEM supports Slack, Office 365, and many other key enterprise apps.

[conite]

I think a Phone that literally does nothing but Voice Calls/SMS and E-mail would have extremely limited appeal. I would have no use for it myself.
I WOULD have use for "Stock" BB10 features and functions, without third party (or any user downloadable) apps.

A device that is focused on communications AND provides functions common to all phones (camera, Calendar, basic utilities, and PDA functions). That's what I'd like.

Everyone has a different line I suppose, and personally mine is at "third party" (non-Core) apps.

...which is a full-fledged OS and we are back to the "billions" statement.

[KAM1138]

Ok, what about BlackBerry then?

Did they convince people of the need for apps? Beyond the BlackBerry UEM client, they have huge suites of enterprise apps - Good/BlackBerry Dynamics, Workspaces, SecureSuite, Work, BBM Enterprise, Access, and on and on and on.

I don't know--I guess so. I'm not familiar with those products or how successful they are. Apparently not successful enough to support an OS or handset market.

Of course, Enterprise and consumer are not really the same. They don't have the same needs or desires. There are probably even finer groupings of customers beyond Enterprise and Consumer.

Where does the bulk of Google or Apple's Income come from--Consumers or Enterprise?

Blackberry (to my understanding) was fairly dominant in Enterprise--and lost that too. Weren't they they "entrenched" power in this arena?

[conite]

I don't know--I guess so. I'm not familiar with those products or how successful they are. Apparently not successful enough to support an OS or handset market.

The apps are all iOS and Android apps.

[conite]

Blackberry (to my understanding) was fairly dominant in Enterprise--and lost that too. Weren't they they "entrenched" power in this arena?

The devices were irrelevant - it was the Mobility Management System that was important to enterprise - and that has been cross-platform for a long time.

BB10 had almost zero buy-in from enterprise. Almost all corporate sales have been Apple since 2012.

[KAM1138]

...which is a full-fledged OS and we are back to the "billions" statement.

Not really, unless you can state that having an app Store adds ZERO complexity/cost.

You also claimed that the "billion" it would cost Blackberry was a FRACTION of the cost that Google spends. Tony stated 2 Billion for Android I believe. And while 1/2 is in fact a fraction--I don't think that's what you were implying.
So, I'm not at all convinced that anyone has accurately stated what it would cost to maintain an OS like BB10 that doesn't have Google Play or an App store of any kind.
You've stated a Billion...and maybe you're right, or maybe it's 500 Million...or 100 Million--all of which makes quite a difference.

Maybe at a Billion it isn't viable. At 100 Million maybe it is.

AND...given that Apple and Google DO support the OS costs via other means, there is a possibility of having SOME source of revenue that could support a different OS as well.

[KAM1138]

The devices were irrelevant - it was the Mobility Management System that was important to enterprise - and that has been cross-platform for a long time.

BB10 had almost zero buy-in from enterprise. Almost all corporate sales have been Apple since 2012.

That's not really addressing the question. Was Blackberry the "entrenched" power at some point in time (2007/2008)?

[conite]

Not really, unless you can state that having an app Store adds ZERO complexity/cost.

You also claimed that the "billion" it would cost Blackberry was a FRACTION of the cost that Google spends. Tony stated 2 Billion for Android I believe. And while 1/2 is in fact a fraction--I don't think that's what you were implying.
So, I'm not at all convinced that anyone has accurately stated what it would cost to maintain an OS like BB10 that doesn't have Google Play or an App store of any kind.
You've stated a Billion...and maybe you're right, or maybe it's 500 Million...or 100 Million--all of which makes quite a difference.

Maybe at a Billion it isn't viable. At 100 Million maybe it is.

AND...given that Apple and Google DO support the OS costs via other means, there is a possibility of having SOME source of revenue that could support a different OS as well.

Sigh. The ENTIRE BB10 infrastructure would have to be rebuilt from scratch. There are no buildings, no developers, no administration, no support, no maintenance, no marketing, no distribution. NOTHING. Please re-read my posts from the beginning, as we constantly seem to be covering old ground.

[KAM1138]

The apps are all iOS and Android apps.

Ok, so what are you trying to say? Blackberry provides Apps for other platforms.

[conite]

That's not really addressing the question. Was Blackberry the "entrenched" power at some point in time (2007/2008)?

Market share, 2008/9.

[conite]

Ok, so what are you trying to say? Blackberry provides Apps for other platforms.

BlackBerry also believes apps and app support is critical and essential for Enterprise.

[KAM1138]

Sigh. The ENTIRE BB10 infrastructure would have to be rebuilt from scratch. There are no buildings, no developers, no administration, no support, no maintenance, no marketing, no distribution. NOTHING. Please re-read my posts from the beginning, as we constantly seem to be covering old ground.

Yeah--you've repeated the same claim throughout.
You've chosen a Billion dollars--some people claim that you (and others) have no idea what you're talking about and are wildly inflating the costs.
I have no basis to know who is right there.

So, while "A billion dollars"--a number chosen by you is equal to "Stop talking about it." I don't see it that way. It's a number--which may or may not be accurate.
And please don't misunderstand--I'm not claiming you ARE inflating your number or that it's inaccurate. I'm saying I have no way of knowing...and we're not even talking about a fixed definite thing. We're talking about a general category of OS (which no one even agrees what extent it should be).

So, saying "it will cost a billion dollars" isn't really that relevant to what I'm talking about. Maybe what I'm talking about is "fantasy" to you, and thus is frustrating. Ok, no hard feelings--I appreciate you providing what I'm sure is the most accurate numbers you can estimate.

However, I will bring one thing up. You started with the example of needing 40 people to create or maintain 2 apps (then shift to supporting two others I think). That doesn't track. OTHERS (I have no basis to make any claims) have stated that Blackberry/RIM was very inefficient in their practices, and that SEEMS to track, because 40 people for a few PDA like apps seems like a stretch. It also doesn't match with the app development cost information that I was looking at yesterday.

So, just saying something seems a BIT off.

[KAM1138]

Ok, was Blackberry a major player in Mobile Devices or not at some point. Let's not quibble over the date.

[conite]

Ok, was Blackberry a major player in Mobile Devices or not at some point. Let's not quibble over the date.

They were always a distant second at best.

[conite]

Yeah--you've repeated the same claim throughout.
You've chosen a Billion dollars--some people claim that you (and others) have no idea what you're talking about and are wildly inflating the costs.
I have no basis to know who is right there.

So, while "A billion dollars"--a number chosen by you is equal to "Stop talking about it." I don't see it that way. It's a number--which may or may not be accurate.
And please don't misunderstand--I'm not claiming you ARE inflating your number or that it's inaccurate. I'm saying I have no way of knowing...and we're not even talking about a fixed definite thing. We're talking about a general category of OS (which no one even agrees what extent it should be).

So, saying "it will cost a billion dollars" isn't really that relevant to what I'm talking about. Maybe what I'm talking about is "fantasy" to you, and thus is frustrating. Ok, no hard feelings--I appreciate you providing what I'm sure is the most accurate numbers you can estimate.

However, I will bring one thing up. You started with the example of needing 40 people to create or maintain 2 apps (then shift to supporting two others I think). That doesn't track. OTHERS (I have no basis to make any claims) have stated that Blackberry/RIM was very inefficient in their practices, and that SEEMS to track, because 40 people for a few PDA like apps seems like a stretch. It also doesn't match with the app development cost information that I was looking at yesterday.

So, just saying something seems a BIT off.

See post 2. I have been entirely consistent about what the team did. You can also refer to the actual thread where the lead developer posted the information.

[KAM1138]

BlackBerry also believes apps and app support is critical and essential for Enterprise.

Ok, was that under dispute? I think I've repeatedly acknowledged that certain users (Enterprise) have certain app needs.

But even so...Android and Apple didn't create Apps or their use on Mobile devices (Although I think many people think they did).

Did Blackberry provide products and services for Enterprise in the past? I've HEARD they did, but you go ahead and tell me if I'm wrong about that.

[KAM1138]

They were always a distant second at best.

Kind of like Apple is a Distant Second now (and still very viable).

[KAM1138]

See post 2. I have been entirely consistent about what the team did. You can also refer to the actual thread where the lead developer posted the information.

Perhaps you misunderstand me. I'm not disputing that what you claimed was accurate--that those people actually were employed to do what you said.
I'm saying that perhaps this is an indication that they weren't particularly efficient.

I don't have any first hand experience at that sort of work, so I don't really know, but what I've read from other sources, and heard other people say would indicate this was probably excessive/bloated.

If your claim is that Blackberry was inefficient/bloated and blew a lot of money...well, I'd tend to believe that.