-
So they got out of the BB10 business, which lowered the break even point. However, they still failed to meet even that level of sales, and so they got out of the hardware side of it as well.
How software compatible are devices made by different manufacturers that use the same chipmaker's SoC and how much backward software compatibility is designed into each subsequent generation of a chipmaker's SoC?
I suspect much more than people here suggest.Dunt Dunt Dunt likes this.10-26-17 12:51 AMLike 1 - It's interesting that in the article you quote it was suggested that the cost of inventory caused the company's financial difficulties that ended it in bankruptcy. Not, according to the company's executives, investment in software R&D.
Much like what happened with the Z10. It is also what I had suspected all along.
That it was up front cost of hardware not software which was BB10's money pit.
Silent Circle was selling an ANDROID phone, and even without a Play Store license, they really didn't need to be overly concerned about an ecosystem, nor did they need to be concerned about their hardware not having drivers.
BB, running a completely different and non-Linux-based platform, had to not only develop (or pay to license) absolutely everything about the OS, including the stock apps, but they also had to pay for all of the infrastructure for all BB10 services (BB World, Blend servers, mobile payments, etc.), design and manage those services (and all the relationships), and critically, deal with all of the DEVELOPER-related costs, such as creating APIs, releasing and updating the development language (Cascades, a custom fork of Qt), the developer environment (to simulate the devices for development purposes), and all of the costs of trying to win and maintain relationships with developers. Oh, and let's not forget the one significant hardware cost: paying QualComm for optimized QNX drivers for any SoCs they were going to use.
As I said, the costs were orders of magnitude apart.
Certainly, the cost of mass-producing the phones themselves was also a massive cost - everyone was always pointing to BB's "money in the bank" without really understanding that almost all of that money was collateral for the phone hardware, so, it was effectively "spent" until they could actually sell the hardware and recover the money, only to "spend" it again for the next batch of phones.
So, with almost all Android devices being rootable the question ibecomes:
How software compatible are devices made by different manufacturers that use the same chipmaker's SoC and how much backward software compatibility is designed into each subsequent generation of a chipmaker's SoC?StephanieMaks likes this.10-26-17 02:02 AMLike 1 - And how was Google/Android able to foot the bill for all of their software development costs (selling not enough Google branded phones in the beginning?), which is claimed to be the downfall of Blackberry?
Because they lined up an aresenal of consumer competitors, and the internals manufacturers and formed the open handset alliance.....the cartel to which the point of BlackBerry's troubles were caused. That has been my point...thanks for detailing all that development difficulty if you weren't going to sell a gazillion devices....yes the recoup for Google wasn't directly the number of sets it sold, but the mass behaviour of all the owners of the sets to which Google was able to monetize through its control of Android, any way you slice it, to me, it amounts to the same thing - cartel/ Open Handset Alliance.
On a lighter or creepy note: Perhaps Google was accidentally tipping its hat to its newly christened unofficial motto - One ring(smartphone) to rule them All - Lord of the Rings....
as just today it set up a donut shop to hand out those iced sugared rings to the masses (lol)
Google just opened a free donut shop in Toronto10-26-17 10:32 PMLike 0 - No doubt Google experimenting with the taking out Tim Horton's in that(donut) market....after all, who can compete with free for very long, right BlackBerry?10-26-17 10:42 PMLike 0
- In response to some posts stating no one would ever throw in good money after billions of losses: Look at smart vehicles (car brand of Daimler) first launched in 1998. After huge R&D invests, dwindling sales and heavy financial losses (billions), smart was liquidated! in 2016 and its operations were absorbed by Daimler directly. Although sales numbers have gone up again, it is still far away from a very profitable business but it has some strategic value to Daimler because of the industry change to car sharing and EVs. Of course, Smart is not at all comparable to BB10 OS but this example shows that in business you can never say never. However, will BlackBerry change its mind? Probably not just because of this Smart example.10-27-17 08:13 AMLike 0
- In response to some posts stating no one would ever throw in good money after billions of losses: Look at smart vehicles (car brand of Daimler) first launched in 1998. After huge R&D invests, dwindling sales and heavy financial losses (billions), smart was liquidated! in 2016 and its operations were absorbed by Daimler directly. Although sales numbers have gone up again, it is still far away from a very profitable business but it has some strategic value to Daimler because of the industry change to car sharing and EVs. Of course, Smart is not at all comparable to BB10 OS but this example shows that in business you can never say never. However, will BlackBerry change its mind? Probably not just because of this Smart example.
But the bigger difference is, as you said, companies will make strategic investments if they are in fact strategic. Daimler is still in the car business and plans to stay in the car business. BB, on the other hand, is out of the phone business and moving to, among other things, the car business.
So no investment in phone anything makes sense for BB unless it can produce immediate returns which they could then invest in their new car business or IoT business.10-27-17 08:22 AMLike 0 - Call Daimler and see if they'll buy BB10. Probably be cheaper than the Smart acquisition.
Regardless of whether I come off as a smart***, the fact that all these internet posters have all these "amazing" ideas but not one, ONE, single corporate entity has put forth a single dollar towards making a new BB10 phone speaks volumes. There's pipe dreams and there's reality.glwerry likes this.10-27-17 08:36 AMLike 1 - Daimler has revenues of $200B, BB is now below $1B annualized. Different circumstances. Even $100M is big money for a small company like BB.
But the bigger difference is, as you said, companies will make strategic investments if they are in fact strategic. Daimler is still in the car business and plans to stay in the car business. BB, on the other hand, is out of the phone business and moving to, among other things, the car business.
So no investment in phone anything makes sense for BB unless it can produce immediate returns which they could then invest in their new car business or IoT business.
Even if Mike and Jim had been actual forward thinking people and released an new modern platform in 2007... would they have been able to beat Apple and Google? Android is free, Android OEM's work off pretty small margins compared to Apple and BlackBerry (back then). Maybe if they had been able to establish then new platform before Activesync made it too the market and they lost their real edge.... and been able to keep BIS in some form factor to allow them to have the position to force carriers to support them.
But BB10 as a OSAAS.... no, no and no.StephanieMaks likes this.10-27-17 01:45 PMLike 1 - I do sometimes wonder if in the end BlackBerry was too small to really compete with their own ecosystem.
Even if Mike and Jim had been actual forward thinking people and released an new modern platform in 2007... would they have been able to beat Apple and Google? Android is free, Android OEM's work off pretty small margins compared to Apple and BlackBerry (back then). Maybe if they had been able to establish then new platform before Activesync made it too the market and they lost their real edge.... and been able to keep BIS in some form factor to allow them to have the position to force carriers to support them.
But BB10 as a OSAAS.... no, no and no.
Posted via CB1010-27-17 03:43 PMLike 0 - I do sometimes wonder if in the end BlackBerry was too small to really compete with their own ecosystem.
Even if Mike and Jim had been actual forward thinking people and released an new modern platform in 2007... would they have been able to beat Apple and Google? Android is free, Android OEM's work off pretty small margins compared to Apple and BlackBerry (back then). Maybe if they had been able to establish then new platform before Activesync made it too the market and they lost their real edge.... and been able to keep BIS in some form factor to allow them to have the position to force carriers to support them.
But BB10 as a OSAAS.... no, no and no.
Also, in terms of cost of driver creation overhead, QNX has had do to that for each new car entertainment system they have developed (assuming minimal backward compatibility as has been said) and as we know Qualcomm open sources most of it so the source is there. Also, there is code commonality in drivers irrespective of OS.
Meaning, QNX should have great expertise with drivers. Qualcomms SoC designs targeting cars and handsets have been converging for years so more redundant work can occur between the two platforms.
Ultimately the real mistake, I think, was that BlackBerry didn't adopt the Android SDK and left native code support in BB10 for later. Porting Android to the native SDK could have been the proof of concept. The desire to support native code in the future would have been THE reason to not license Google Play Services.
Those that have read Losing the Signal know that this was considered early on in the development stage, but there was a push to leave Java behind. Not having to create an SDK, but to get Android working with Flow would likely have reduced time to market. But more importantly it would have improved developer ROI for BB10. For those thinking of OS/2, Android was an Open Source OS and BlackBerry could have been a counterbalance to Google's eventual privatizing of it. It is hard to believe that Android would come to this could not have been foreseen.
Its a shame that when John Chen became CEO he didn't chose to take the advice of Alan Brenner before essentially EOLing BB10 by licensing GPS. Of course we don't know for sure what BlackBerry's licensing terms are and now that they are not a device manufacturer they may be free to use Android as they like.10-28-17 01:34 PMLike 0 -
Its a shame that when John Chen became CEO he didn't chose to take the advice of Alan Brenner before essentially EOLing BB10 by licensing GPS. Of course we don't know for sure what BlackBerry's licensing terms are and now that they are not a device manufacturer they may be free to use Android as they like.
The game was up for a new platform by 2008/9, BlackBerry didn't find that out until 2013, and others still stubbornly wander the land of unicorns.Last edited by conite; 10-28-17 at 01:58 PM.
StephanieMaks likes this.10-28-17 01:44 PMLike 1 - People here that say BlackBerry had to write their own OS seem disingenuous to me because underneath the UI and apps much of the work was done with the exception of optimization for battery life in Neutrino. Writing apps is not the same thing as building an OS from scratch.
iOS was based on OSX, which itself was based on BSD, and Apple still worked on iOS for at least 3 years before releasing the first iPhone, and has continued to have big teams work on its development for the last 10 years. Why all of that work for an OS that already existed?
Why did MS have 2000 people working on WinPhone? Why did BB have 1800 people or so working on BB10 (just the OS)?
Simple: what you describe is simply not - even a little bit - how things actually are. Smartphone hardware is radically different from desktop-class hardware, and the OS that runs on it has to be a whole lot different too. Building a mobile OS (much less an entire platform, of which the OS is only a part) is a massive project, that requires a ton of manpower and a ton of money.
Look at SailFish - another Linux-based OS that is essentially just a continuation of WebOS, and yet after literally years of independent development, they managed to release a version (a year late) that an run on a single sub-model of a single phone, and STILL has problems with major subsystems such as BlueTooth. Yet, BT and everything else worked on Palm devices 10 years ago, so why does it take so much developing just to make it work on a single sub-model of one model of phone, and why do things that used to work no longer work?
BECAUSE IT'S FAR, FAR MORE DIFFICULT THAN YOU IMAGINE.StephanieMaks and Dunt Dunt Dunt like this.10-28-17 03:31 PMLike 2 -
Posted via CB1010-28-17 05:38 PMLike 0 - Look at SailFish - another Linux-based OS that is essentially just a continuation of WebOS, and yet after literally years of independent development, they managed to release a version (a year late) that an run on a single sub-model of a single phone, and STILL has problems with major subsystems such as BlueTooth. Yet, BT and everything else worked on Palm devices 10 years ago, so why does it take so much developing just to make it work on a single sub-model of one model of phone, and why do things that used to work no longer work?
Yeah I'll need to see sources for this as well. I think at minimum it's safe to say devices were de-emphasized after BlackBerry wanted to increase software sales but they still kept devices going hoping they could find profitability.10-28-17 05:47 PMLike 0 - They had a head start because Neutrino was designed for embedded systems. That they didn't take as much advantage of the real time functionality of Neutrino is that SoCs for phones were not optimized for a real time OS. The architecture could be very different. Think what Apple's SoC would be like if it was using a real time OS instead of BSD. Perhaps, that is why top people from QNX have been hired by Apple.
Lots of conjecture here. Would like some sources too. Like evidence regarding the licensing terms of Android.10-28-17 06:06 PMLike 0 -
https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile...samsung-tizen/10-28-17 06:15 PMLike 0 - 10-28-17 06:27 PMLike 1
- The numbers of increasing personnel being talked about doesn't breakdown into what type of personnel and how many of them are customer facing. Developing a product and making it market ready is hugely different in terms of personnel numbers required. And we aren't even considering that many of these are marketing besides customer relations people, because this discussion has been about maintaining existing customers (and developers by extension).10-28-17 06:37 PMLike 0
- They had a head start because Neutrino was designed for embedded systems. That they didn't take as much advantage of the real time functionality of Neutrino is that SoCs for phones were not optimized for a real time OS. The architecture could be very different. Think what Apple's SoC would be like if it was using a real time OS instead of BSD. Perhaps, that is why top people from QNX have been hired by Apple.
Lots of conjecture here. Would like some sources too. Like evidence regarding the licensing terms of Android.
What possible advantage does RT scheduling have in a modern smartphone? And pls don’t say preemptive multitasking. The only place that RT equals preemptive multitasking is on Crackberry.StephanieMaks likes this.10-28-17 07:23 PMLike 1 - They had a head start because Neutrino was designed for embedded systems. That they didn't take as much advantage of the real time functionality of Neutrino is that SoCs for phones were not optimized for a real time OS. The architecture could be very different. Think what Apple's SoC would be like if it was using a real time OS instead of BSD. Perhaps, that is why top people from QNX have been hired by Apple.
Lots of conjecture here. Would like some sources too. Like evidence regarding the licensing terms of Android.
Of the new smartphone SoCs that come out, zero of them run QNX because Qualcomm spends no time anymore doing QNX drivers. Chen explained this years ago. The cost of making QNX run on these new SoC’s is something BB had to pay for.
Why do you think they kept re-using the S4?StephanieMaks likes this.10-28-17 07:29 PMLike 1 - The numbers of increasing personnel being talked about doesn't breakdown into what type of personnel and how many of them are customer facing. Developing a product and making it market ready is hugely different in terms of personnel numbers required. And we aren't even considering that many of these are marketing besides customer relations people, because this discussion has been about maintaining existing customers (and developers by extension).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BlackB...ersion_history
BlackBerry Sweden was closed around 10.3.2.x and there were additional layoffs shortly after that IIRC.
Without any new devices a userbase will inevitably head towards 0, why would developers learn new tools at that prospect? And what will existing customers do when their devices break or need to be replaced?10-28-17 07:42 PMLike 0 - Those people were hired to work on the car project. RT makes a ton of sense in a car.
What possible advantage does RT scheduling have in a modern smartphone? And pls don’t say preemptive multitasking. The only place that RT equals preemptive multitasking is on Crackberry.10-28-17 08:12 PMLike 0 - ]I was referring to increased staffing claimed at Google, Microsoft, etc and that the breakdown of staffing was not indicated. So, we don't know how many of the claimed 600 were doing OS development.
But that is why new devices based on BB10 with bug fixes are desired by many.10-28-17 08:16 PMLike 0 -
- Forum
- BlackBerry 10 Phones & OS
- BlackBerry 10 OS
BB10 OSaaS Business Model for BlackBerry?
Similar Threads
-
BlackBerry Motion hitting UK in November
By devdrop in forum BlackBerry MotionReplies: 25Last Post: 11-24-17, 12:33 PM -
New Incipio cases for the BlackBerry Motion
By Bla1ze in forum BlackBerry MotionReplies: 11Last Post: 10-24-17, 06:15 PM -
BlackBerry KEYone shrinks media files when its storing them on the sd card
By NoahDieckmann in forum BlackBerry KEYoneReplies: 1Last Post: 10-18-17, 08:47 AM -
Grab a BlackBerry KEYone for only $499.99 for a limited time from Best Buy and Amazon!
By CrackBerry News in forum CrackBerry.com News Discussion & ContestsReplies: 0Last Post: 10-18-17, 12:10 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD