[anon(10154733)]

Hey all,

So maybe I've got a fundamental misunderstanding of the BB10 OS here, and if that's the case then I'm sure someone will correct me. But, my understanding is that BB10 is based on QNX. Also, I understand that the OS that BlackBerry is selling (successfully by the sounds of it) to car manufacturers is basically the same QNX base. So my thinking is, BlackBerry is in it for the long term to develop and maintain that QNX base upon which their vehicle OS is based and thus this means it would be easy and likely for the BB10 OS to be maintained. After all, they're still developing the core OS powering BB10 anyways right?

I'd love to hear everyone else's feedback on this, since maybe I've got something very wrong here.

Posted via CB10

[Bla1ze]

You have an over inflated sense of QNX's involvement in BlackBerry 10 through no fault of your own. It was presented that way for many years. You're also not taking into account that BlackBerry has no interest in further development of BlackBerry 10. You'll get maintenance updates for a while, that's it and I say this to you and anyone else reading this. Let it go. Enjoy BlackBerry 10 for what it is. Its time to shine, and succeed is long gone. You either love it for it is, or you end up loathing 'what it could have been.'

[Uzi]

Ah yes hypervisor, dual boot two environment running at the same time could be a saviour

CB Mod

[BigBadWulf]

Bla1ze, the new face of Debbie Downer.

OP, there are many technical reasons why your theory sounds good, but is completely wrong, In the end, as Bla1ze said, it really doesn't matter. The BB10 ship has sunk, and there's no bringing it back to the surface.

[BigBadWulf]

Ah yes hypervisor, dual boot two environment running at the same time could be a saviour

CB Mod

Shadup youze!

[anon(10154733)]

Thanks. From a marketing and resource perspective I get it. There is not going to be a bb10 resurgence. I guess I'm thinking best case scenario maintenance and security updates continue longer term. These will likely be a part of the QNX (and maybe I'm using the wrong terminology here as I don't know the proper name of the BlackBerry vehicle OS) development and maintenance anyways no?

Posted via CB10

[howarmat]

bb10 QNX is not the same as any other QNX resources that BB uses. bb10 has nothing to do with anything else bb has going forward

[anon(10154733)]

Thanks howarmat, that's what I was wondering I guess but don't have a a good enough technical understanding of either OS

Posted via CB10

[BigBadWulf]

To my knowledge, no one at QNX had a hand in writing BB10. BB10 didn't keep up with QNX development either, and updating would require a complete rewrite of the OS, along with all apps. Someone like @Troy Tiscareno could best explain the details. Nothing will change the fact there is no future.

[Uzi]

@Troy Tiscareno please chime in

CB Mod

[anon(10154733)]

OK, thanks for the explanation. My logic was that bb10 was to QNX as android is to Linux (or something like that)

Posted via CB10

[conite]

OK, thanks for the explanation. My logic was that bb10 was to QNX as android is to Linux (or something like that)

Posted via CB10

But why would continued development of Linux make it "easy and likely for the Android OS to be maintained" ?

[anon(10154733)]

"Easier" maybe? I fully admit I don't have the technical knowledge here and am not trying to debate. would a cessation of development of the Linux kernel not present a hindrance to android just as continued development of the kernel benefits android? (I realize QNX is not a kernel. ) If the answer is "no, not at all. This is not analogous to that" (as it seems to be. And I'm sure my analogy is flawed anyways) then OK, I stand educated

Posted via CB10

[BigBadWulf]

@Troy Tiscareno please chime in

CB Mod

[BigBadWulf]

"Easier" maybe? I fully admit I don't have the technical knowledge here and am not trying to debate. would a cessation of development of the Linux kernel not present a hindrance to android just as continued development of the kernel benefits android? (I realize QNX is not a kernel. ) If the answer is "no, not at all. This is not analogous to that" (as it seems to be. And I'm sure my analogy is flawed anyways) then OK, I stand educated

Posted via CB10

Think of it this way...
Was it easier to develop aftermarket upgrades for cars, before or after all the computers were added?

[thurask]

The QNX core isn't the same thing as all of BB10. Even if the core is shared, the developer support for consumer apps and hardware support for consumer devices is very different from automotive, in that they only exist for automotive.

I mean, Windows 10, Windows Phone 10 and the Xbox One OS all use the same core, but Windows Phone isn't exactly tearing up the phone market, is it.

[anon(10154733)]

Think of it this way...
Was it easier to develop aftermarket upgrades for cars, before or after all the computers were added?

Well, certainly the introduction of computers to cars made it more difficult for those that manufacture aftermarket parts. What is the computer and what is the car in this analogy?

Posted via CB10

[anon(10154733)]

The QNX core isn't the same thing as all of BB10. Even if the core is shared, the developer support for consumer apps and hardware support for consumer devices is very different from automotive, in that they only exist for automotive.

I mean, Windows 10, Windows Phone 10 and the Xbox One OS all use the same core, but Windows Phone isn't exactly tearing up the phone market, is it.

@thurask fair enough. My question was simply in terms of how easy it would be to maintain basic security and other updates of the OS.

Posted via CB10

[BigBadWulf]

Well, certainly the introduction of computers to cars made it more difficult for those that manufacture aftermarket parts. What is the computer and what is the car in this analogy?

Posted via CB10

The point was advancements create challenges. They don't make things easier. Usually

[thurask]

@thurask fair enough. My question was simply in terms of how easy it would be to maintain basic security and other updates of the OS.

Posted via CB10

It depends. Security standards between the two aren't the same, since attack surfaces and management is so different; no NIAP for cars, namely. Maybe some trivial updates could be shared, but without source access we can only speculate just how much is shared between phones and cars. Still, if the overlap between embedded development work and phone development work was as great as some hope, then 10.3.3 might not have been delayed so long for what little it brought to the table.

But really, even if the foundation of BB10 is strong, the house on top is falling apart at the seams.

[anon(10154733)]

It depends. Security standards between the two aren't the same, since attack surfaces and management is so different; no NIAP for cars, namely. Maybe some trivial updates could be shared, but without source access we can only speculate just how much is shared between phones and cars. Still, if the overlap between embedded development work and phone development work was as great as some hope, then 10.3.3 might not have been delayed so long for what little it brought to the table.

But really, even if the foundation of BB10 is strong, the house on top is falling apart at the seams.

Very interesting, thanks. The question of development overlap between embedded and phone development I guess is where I'm relatively clueless

Posted via CB10

[BigBadWulf]

Very interesting, thanks. The question of development overlap between embedded and phone development I guess is where I'm relatively clueless

Posted via CB10

I'm afraid in that respect, so was BlackBerry.

[anon(10154733)]

I'm afraid in that respect, so was BlackBerry.

Haha. Ultimately that's my question then. That is, is there enough overlap between the embedded device OS and phone development to make basic maintenance of the latter trivial or at least low cost, or am I asking about apples and oranges?

Posted via CB10

[BigBadWulf]

Haha. Ultimately that's my question then. That is, is there enough overlap between the embedded device OS and phone development to make basic maintenance of the latter trivial or at least low cost, or am I asking about apples and oranges?

Posted via CB10

There may be a couple oranges left, but it takes a bushel to keep up with the apples.

[Vistaus]

"Easier" maybe? I fully admit I don't have the technical knowledge here and am not trying to debate. would a cessation of development of the Linux kernel not present a hindrance to android just as continued development of the kernel benefits android? (I realize QNX is not a kernel. ) If the answer is "no, not at all. This is not analogous to that" (as it seems to be. And I'm sure my analogy is flawed anyways) then OK, I stand educated

Posted via CB10

You forget to take into account that Linux is open source. If Linus ever stopped Linux development, it will get forked. Hell, Google might even fork it themselves.

Posted via CB10 using my amazing  Passport (OG Red)