[DonHB]

Perfect. Pay to play. There you go.

BlackBerry is not a charity.

I'll see what the company offers for developers. I think a free developer's license would be inexpensive marketing.

[app_Developer]

Perfect. Pay to play. There you go.

BlackBerry is not a charity.

Yes, but making this available for people to experiment with on Pi’s or NUC’s would at least keep QNX in the minds of developers. We hire people from school or from AI/ML teams at other companies, and most have not even heard of QNX anymore. Linux is what they are comfortable with.

[conite]

Yes, but making this available for people to experiment with on Pi’s or NUC’s would at least keep QNX in the minds of developers. We hire people from school or from AI/ML teams at other companies, and most have not even heard of QNX anymore. Linux is what they are comfortable with.

Just shows they aren't interested in a long-game. Or have done the math on the long-game and decided it wasn't worth it.

Pay now is their decided strategy.

[app_Developer]

Just shows they aren't interested in a long-game. Or have done the math on the long-game and decided it wasn't worth it.

Pay now is their decided strategy.

Yeah, I agree. I think if I was at BB, I’d agree with that approach . Keep QNX alive for another 10 years in auto and invest in other things.

[conite]

Yeah, I agree. I think if I was at BB, I’d agree with that approach . Keep QNX alive for another 10 years in auto and invest in other things.

Yes. It's certainly not worth taking their eye of the ball. They need all hands on deck on their primary businesses.

[DonHB]

Yeah, I agree. I think if I was at BB, I’d agree with that approach . Keep QNX alive for another 10 years in auto and invest in other things.

Then why did they create this new BSP for the Raspberry Pi 4? I hear it is used in industry, but I haven't heard of any products though.

[app_Developer]

Then why did they create this new BSP for the Raspberry Pi 4? I hear it is used in industry, but I haven't heard of any products though.

Good question for BB. My guess is they grew out of some customer wanting them. Or maybe one of the universities with which they partner?

[conite]

Then why did they create this new BSP for the Raspberry Pi 4? I hear it is used in industry, but I haven't heard of any products though.

Because they got sufficiently paid to do it.

[Chuck Finley69]

Yes, but making this available for people to experiment with on Pi’s or NUC’s would at least keep QNX in the minds of developers. We hire people from school or from AI/ML teams at other companies, and most have not even heard of QNX anymore. Linux is what they are comfortable with.

BlackBerry is simply lacking any extra cash flow not better spent on existing strategies. Not saying the strategies are successful just better choice than whatever's next.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

Good question for BB. My guess is they grew out of some customer wanting them. Or maybe one of the universities with which they partner?

Did anything ever replace the Foundry27?

Is there a community for QNX developers? Some place that DonHB might have more sucess asking questions?

[DonHB]

Did anything ever replace the Foundry27?

Is there a community for QNX developers? Some place that DonHB might have more sucess asking questions?

It still exists and it offers 32-bit QNX (<=6.6) BSPs with Apache II license (link for VMware ISO is here too, but requires a commercial license):
https://community.qnx.com/sf/wiki/do...p/wiki/X86Bios

No Raspberry Pi support, but a third party sells a license for Pi 2 for 6.5 and 6.6.

Still think a developer license should be offered free on Raspberry Pi Foundation's Web Site for the Pi 4. This would expand the numbers of developers experienced with the platform. Also, developers with this license should be able to partner with commercial licensees to produce products for sale. It would not allow sales of works produced using the license without arranging a commercial license, but could be used by hobbyists and makers for personal use. Developers should be allowed to share their work for free, though.

Need to remind myself with terms of Apache II.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

It still exists and it offers 32-bit QNX (<=6.6) BSPs with Apache II license (link for VMware ISO is here too, but requires a commercial license):
https://community.qnx.com/sf/wiki/do...p/wiki/X86Bios

No Raspberry Pi support, but a third party sells a license for Pi 2 for 6.5 and 6.6.

Still think a developer license should be offered free on Raspberry Pi Foundation's Web Site for the Pi 4. This would expand the numbers of developers experienced with the platform. Also, developers with this license should be able to partner with commercial licensees to produce products for sale. It would not allow sales of works produced using the license without arranging a commercial license, but could be used by hobbyists and makers for personal use. Developers should be allowed to share their work for free, though.

Need to remind myself with terms of Apache II.

I'm not against this....

Just think it's too late now. Even if BlackBerry opened it up and spent time and effort (money) to improve the developer tools. WHY would anyone bother with a still proprietary OS? What happens if BlackBerry goes away and someone else buys QNX?

Lot's of smart developers worked at QNX.... my guess is many of them might have wanted the OS left as is. But in the end it was still a proprietary OS. All the free to download or better developer tools... isn't going to change that.

In the end think that's why Linux is slowly taking over the automotive space. Maybe in 10 - 15 years when QNX is worthless to whoever owns it (doubt it will be BlackBerry at that point) , they'll open source it.

[app_Developer]

They can offer a free developer license. That would be fun. But it’s low risk and low reward.

Apache 2 is a very friendly license. It won’t get in any honest user’s way.

[lolo9269]

On the native browser for small screen
You can add as bookmark so after loading type short K to ajust screen


Try this on your browser url bar after a site is loading like google map or other like instagram touch.facebook.com all mobile website

Nice for this small screen of classic
Paste on your url

javascript:document.getElementsByName("viewport")[0].setAttribute("content","width=device-width,initial-scale=0.8,minimum-scale=0.4,maximum-scale=0.8");document.getElementByid("viewport").se tAttribute("content","width=device-width,initial-scale=0.8,minimum-scale=0.4,maximum-scale=0.80");



Posted via CB10

[DonHB]

They can offer a free developer license. That would be fun. But it’s low risk and low reward.

I think the reward is higher than you think. By allowing developers to prototype on QNX at similar cost as the most obvious competitors, partnerships with potential customers can be created at little to no cost to BlackBerry. You shouldn't discount how increasing the numbers of developers experienced with the platform will add markets that BlackBerry doesn't regularly serve.

[app_Developer]

I think the reward is higher than you think.

Of course you do.

[conite]

I think the reward is higher than you think.

Why do you believe you are the only one able to do this math? And without any the internal metrics that BlackBerry possesses?

[DonHB]

Why do you believe you are the only one able to do this math? And without any the internal metrics that BlackBerry possesses?

Is it due to politics or metrics? Few would argue that the company's licensing terms limit the potential customer base and the possibility of OSS projects forming around current 64-bit versions of QNX-7. Foundry 27 only offers 32-bit 6.6 and older versions. So, that doesn't help counter the problem. I am suggesting that QNX offer a free developer's license for the Raspberry Pi 4 as a trial balloon. The trial could be for the Model B only and not the Compute Module 4.

The problem is that as of QNX-7 no UI is included and it would be good to be able to develop on the Pi 4 rather than requiring a development system to create binaries and to remotely debug code. However, this could be the impetus for the first OSS project that could come out of the trial. It does have the Screen graphics system so porting a GUI that uses Wayland or similar should be possible. This would also show how the platform can go beyond embedded systems and function as a desktop or server OS.

This was done for a mini ITX x64 system and could be a basis for an ARM port:
https://gitlab.com/elahav/screenwm

[conite]

Is it due to politics or metrics?

BlackBerry is only concerned about ROI.

[DonHB]

BlackBerry is only concerned about ROI.

As in office politics: it's the way we have "always" done it. And it's likely not the best for RoI.

[conite]

As in office politics: it's the way we have "always" done it. And it's likely not the best for RoI.

...but you're saying you know better.

[DonHB]

...but you're saying you know better.

No, I am writing from a small (and perhaps medium business perspective). By providing a free developer's license BlackBerry becomes a partner by its preexisting investment in that software. It lowers the barrier to entry and reduces the risk for small business not least because it could increase the number of developers with QNX experience. It would be an effective means of marketing to small businesses.

What do you see as negatives, assuming the developer license does not include any support other than on-line documentation and perhaps access to public forums (maybe Foundry27) which could be anonymously and judiciously responded to by QNX for issues which would benefit paying customers as well.

[conite]

No, I am writing from a small (and perhaps medium business perspective). By providing a free developer's license BlackBerry becomes a partner by its investment in that software and lowers the barrier to entry. It would be an effective means of marketing to small businesses.

What do you see as negatives, assuming the developer license does not include any support other than on-line documentation and perhaps access to public forums (maybe Foundry27) which could be anonymously and judiciously responded to by QNX for issues which would benefit paying customers as well.

You keep going over your idea - again and again.

You may not like it, but BlackBerry CHOSE not to go this route because they didn't see an acceptable ROI.

It's not complicated. If you want to convince them otherwise, go pound on their door.

[DonHB]

You keep going over your idea - again and again.

You may not like it, but BlackBerry CHOSE not to go this route because they didn't see an acceptable ROI.

It's not complicated. If you want to convince them otherwise, go pound on their door.

Again, what do you see as a negative?

Could it be not about RoI, but fear that it would result in lost sales? Not thinking that this is somewhat like a barter transaction where QNX provides the tools and the developer provides the time? By the time a prototype is done the developer would know if a resale license is opportune? If not this time more developers have experience with the QNX platform; in-in-of-itself a benefit.

[conite]

Again what do you see as a negative?

Could it be not about RoI, but fear that it would result in lost sales? Not thinking that this is somewhat like a barter transaction where QNX provides the tools and the developer provides the time? By the time a prototype is done the developer would know if a resale license is opportune? If not this time one more developer has experience with the QNX platform; in-in-of itself a benefit.

It's all about ROI. Any new project is measured by the NET gain it would bring.