If BB10 was a paid OS would we pay for it?! Thoughts inspired by a new Crackberry article.

Yes, depending on the price and I rather purchase it once. In today's OS's, the word free doesn't mean without cost. I rather spend my money up front, (like many of us do for our devices than barter with my personal information.

But an exorbitant price is a deal breaker. I remember when the Microsoft Office OS could be purchase for $100-300 for life. Then it was decided it would be more profitable to lease the platform, causing the consumer to purchase it over and over again.

Still, A BlackBerry Fan!!!

Originally Posted by KNEBB

Yes, depending on the price and I rather purchase it once. In today OS's, the word free doesn't mean without cost. I rather spend my money up front, (like many of us do for our devices) than barter with my personal information.

Still, A BlackBerry Fan!!!

The rub is that you have to have tens of millions of users to spread proprietary OS development costs over enough people to make it financially feasible.

Currently, there are less than a million BB10 users when it's free.

Interface wise, BB10 rules them all as a matter of Fact. The issue was not enough App support which diminished the entire Eco system.

That's the past. All BlackBerry can do now is put BB10 into the vault until the world is ready to replace the ageing Android.

Originally Posted by nt300

Interface wise, BB10 rules them all as a matter of Fact opinon.

Fixed that for you.

Originally Posted by nt300

That's the past. All BlackBerry can do now is put BB10 into the vault until the world is ready to replace the ageing Android.

BB10 is going in the vault, and never coming out. Once it's over next year, it's over for good.

Originally Posted by KNEBB

But an absorbent price is a deal breaker. I remember when the Microsoft Office OS could be purchase for $100-300 for life. Then it was decided it would be more profitable to lease the platform, causing the consumer to purchase it over and over again.

Still, A BlackBerry Fan!!!

"Exorbitant" is the word you want. "Absorbent" means it soaks up liquid well.

The leasing of Office is an interesting one - I lease it because by leasing I also get 1 Terabyte of cloud storage.
At the time that I signed on it was the best storage deal around. So, yes, I could have purchased Office for a one time fee, but then I'm having to rent / lease my cloud storage anyways. So, this way I have killed both birds with the one stone.

Originally Posted by Elephant_Canyon

Fixed that for you.

Actually, if one writes something enough times, it becomes true.

Originally Posted by conite

The rub is that you have to have tens of millions of users to spread proprietary OS development costs over enough people to make it financially feasible.

Currently, there are less than a million BB10 users when it's free.

What do you mean BB10 is Free? You pay for a piece of hardware that has software installed. Is anyone getting BB10 outside of paying for a product with it installed.
Currently there are less than a Million BB10 users who PAID for the product.

Is iOS "free" when you buy an iPhone?

Originally Posted by Astrobiologist

On a tangent, if Chen really has said this then doesn't this mean that basically BB10 will live on after all?
If someone really is going to build BB10 devices then it is likely that there will some updates and also that there will be an Appstore of some sort.

He didn't say it though, he simply said he'd like to see a new Bold when asked about retro BlackBerry devices. BB10 speculation is purely CrackBerry.

https://www.recode.net/2018/4/19/172...ode-transcript

Originally Posted by KAM1138

What do you mean BB10 is Free? You pay for a piece of hardware that has software installed. Is anyone getting BB10 outside of paying for a product with it installed.
Currently there are less than a Million BB10 users who PAID for the product.

Is iOS "free" when you buy an iPhone?

yes all OS are "free" but that would not be the case. The cost for your phone with this supposed new bb10 would be compounded by huge OS development costs.

Ex

Phone with android 8 installed cost is $500
Phone with new BB10 installed cost is $900

So essentially you are paying $400 for just the OS.

Originally Posted by howarmat

yes all OS are "free" but that would not be the case. The cost for your phone with this supposed new bb10 would be compounded by huge OS development costs.

Ex

Phone with android 8 installed cost is $500
Phone with new BB10 installed cost is $900

So essentially you are paying $400 for just the OS.

You're not buying two separate products--you're buying a phone that has software on it.
What you're (accurately) referring to is ADDITIONAL costs--development costs. The cost of BB10 is not and has never been "free".

It's reasonable that additional development costs would lead to a higher product cost.
But pretending as if BB10 is currently "free" just isn't the case. It's rolled into the cost, exactly the same as it would be if it were to be used on a new device.

KAM

Originally Posted by KAM1138

What do you mean BB10 is Free? You pay for a piece of hardware that has software installed. Is anyone getting BB10 outside of paying for a product with it installed.
Currently there are less than a Million BB10 users who PAID for the product.

Is iOS "free" when you buy an iPhone?

BlackBerry lost billions on OS development because they never recovered a penny on it.

The revenues from device sales barely covered the hardware. So yes, BB10 was free to the end users.

Originally Posted by conite

BlackBerry lost billions on OS development because they never recovered a penny on it.

The revenues from device sales barely covered the hardware. So yes, BB10 was free to the end users.

That is utter nonsense--you're completely twisting things to suit your narrative. You're drawing arbitrary lines and saying "Oh all the money went to cover HARDWARE costs, but none to cover OS development costs. That's ridiculous.

No, BB10 wasn't "free", the Hardware wasn't "Free"--and the fact that Blackberry lost money doesn't change that. Customers PAID for the complete product.

Originally Posted by KAM1138

That is utter nonsense--you're completely twisting things to suit your narrative. You're drawing arbitrary lines and saying "Oh all the money went to cover HARDWARE costs, but none to cover OS development costs. That's ridiculous.

No, BB10 wasn't "free", the Hardware wasn't "Free"--and the fact that Blackberry lost money doesn't change that. Customers PAID for the complete product.

What's the twist?

If they barely recovered manufacturing and distribution costs, what's left over for development?

Suppliers have to be paid first.

The costs for BB10 were never actually passed on to the users.

Originally Posted by conite

What's the twist?

If they barely recovered manufacturing and distribution costs, what's left over for development?

You're fantasizing that they say "Well, we've got X dollars from BB10 Phone sales, we're gonna cover those hardware costs, but OH NO--we're out of money to cover BB10!"

I can just as easily say that they recovered 10% costs for BB10 development, and therefore Zero for Hardware costs.

No one bought Hardware and an OS separately--so you can't say "Well, X dollars of sales is exclusively for Hardware." That's what you're attempting to claim, and that's totally arbitrary.

Originally Posted by KAM1138

That is utter nonsense--you're completely twisting things to suit your narrative. You're drawing arbitrary lines and saying "Oh all the money went to cover HARDWARE costs, but none to cover OS development costs. That's ridiculous.

No, BB10 wasn't "free", the Hardware wasn't "Free"--and the fact that Blackberry lost money doesn't change that. Customers PAID for the complete product.

As long as the gap between carrying the costs and making profit was probably huge, Conite is right.

If you make and sell cookies and won't earn enough to pay the production costs, then you didn't recover a penny (for yourself and not the bakers or suppliers).

Originally Posted by skrble

As long as the gap between carrying the costs and making profit was probably huge, Conite is right.

Nonsense. You're drawing arbitrary lines based on sales for a unified product. No customer paid for Hardware, and NOT for Software when buying a BB10 phone. That's just ridiculous.

Originally Posted by KAM1138

You're fantasizing that they say "Well, we've got X dollars from BB10 Phone sales, we're gonna cover those hardware costs, but OH NO--we're out of money to cover BB10!"

I can just as easily say that they recovered 10% costs for BB10 development, and therefore Zero for Hardware costs.

No one bought Hardware and an OS separately--so you can't say "Well, X dollars of sales is exclusively for Hardware." That's what you're attempting to claim, and that's totally arbitrary.

You apply overhead AFTER your direct input costs. This isn't rocket science.

Originally Posted by conite

Suppliers have to be paid first.

The costs for BB10 were never actually passed on to the users.

Oh really--so Blackberry set pricing without ANY thought towards covering (SORRY--CHANGE HERE) SOFTWARE (not-hardware costs). They said "Well, we're gonna sell the first 2 Million units to cover hardware costs, but then we'll start to pay for OS development from the next 5 Million, despite the fact that each UNIT has an associated hardware cost.

Originally Posted by KAM1138

Nonsense. You're drawing arbitrary lines based on sales for a unified product. No customer paid for Hardware, and NOT for Software when buying a BB10 phone. That's just ridiculous.

In case you don't sell both hardware and software separately, then it's just one product as both of the standalone parts are just useless. You can't use the hardware for any other purpose and won't run the OS on any other device either. It doesn't make sense to discus "for what they paid" , they paid for the product which can't be split.

Originally Posted by conite

You apply overhead AFTER your direct input costs. This isn't rocket science.

So, did Blackberry pay any money for Hardware (production) of any units BEFORE receiving money from sales or not?

Originally Posted by skrble

In case you don't sell both hardware and software separately, then it's just one product as both of the standalone parts are just useless. You can't use the hardware for any other purpose and won't run the OS on any other device either. It doesn't make sense to discus "for what they paid" , they paid for the product which can't be split.

Well, yes--that's exactly what I'm saying. Customers paid for a piece of hardware with software installed.

Originally Posted by KAM1138

So, did Blackberry pay any money for Hardware (production) of any units BEFORE receiving money from sales or not?

Sure. If you sell cookies, at first you have to carry a lot of costs (material, oven, staff, rent a corner in the street to sell them). You can't start baking cookies and earn money at the same time.

Ford won't get any money for a Kuga until it produces it and sells it. Read again what Conite wrote. :)

Originally Posted by howarmat

I think a brick wall understands this better....

If you think that Someone paid for a BB10 phone, and they only paid for hardware, then you're fooling yourself.

The fact that Blackberry lost money on the overall venture doesn't change this. Blackberry lost money on software, hardware, marketing--the whole venture.

To claim that they lost money ONLY on one piece of that is fantasy, based on nothing but an arbitrary line chosen by someone attempting to support their opinion about BB10.

Originally Posted by howarmat

yes all OS are "free" but that would not be the case. The cost for your phone with this supposed new bb10 would be compounded by huge OS development costs.

Ex

Phone with android 8 installed cost is $500
Phone with new BB10 installed cost is $900

So essentially you are paying $400 for just the OS.

Are we asking BlackBerry to make devices or simply offer the OS. Assume the lost that they've incurred. That's a done deal, that been written off. Going forward, what do they currently offer the Business Sector that can be dumbed down and adapted to the Consumer Market.

Still, A BlackBerry Fan!!!

Originally Posted by skrble

Sure. If you sell cookies, at first you have to carry a lot of costs (material, oven, staff, rent a corner in the street to sell them). You can't start baking cookies and earn money at the same time.

Ford won't get any money for a Kuga until it produces it and sells it. Read again what Conite wrote. :)

I read what he said, and it's nonsense.

Customers did not buy a separate hardware and software product. They bought a Phone which included both. You cannot pretend, no matter how many times you repeat it, that this was not the case.

Customers paid for a Phone with an operating system. Unless you can demonstrate that's not true, then the claim that BB10 was "free" (not paid for by customers) is false--a distortion at best.

Sophistry.