[conite]

While I wish to see some sources for this here is mine "one of the two people tasked with porting QNX " https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/black...jung-myeng-lee . Stop spreading BS.

Posted via CB10

He's talking about porting the QNX micro-controler to a development board to skip over having to set up a bunch of hardware.

Has nothing to do with what you're talking about.

[conite]

Stop spreading BS.

Seriously? You're going to go there?

[danifulger]

He's talking about porting the QNX micro-controler to a development board to skip over having to set up a bunch of hardware.

Has nothing to do with what you're talking about.

Seriously doubt Bb invested a rewrite of the whole thing

Posted via CB10

[Chuck Finley69]

Seriously doubt Bb invested a rewrite of the whole thing

Posted via CB10

They spent those billions of dollars on something. They spent like what 2-3-4 years on the BB10 project with delays.

[Richard Buckley]

Seriously doubt Bb invested a rewrite of the whole thing

Posted via CB10

I have to wonder if you are working with a different definition of "porting software" than is canonical in the industry. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porting

Porting a Windows programme to Linux, for example, can be quite costly because the UI and API are so different. But their are benefits to having the program run "native". On the other hand emulation of various sorts can allow you to run software compiled for one platform on another without recompiling. The ability of BB10 to run Android APPS without recompiling is an excellent example.

What the article you linked to described is a rather typical experience of porting an OS to new hardware, except that it was probably a lot easier with QNX because it is not sold in combination with any specific hardware configuration, so it has been evolved to make that processes easier. BlackBerry QNX even has a project they call the Foundry where developers can get help an share ideas on porting QNX to new hardware environments.

LeapSTR100-2/10.3.3.2205