[glwerry]

Let's assume BlackBerry does make an autoloader for the Motion with the Browser and libraries updated and other fixes to the OS would any of you buy it? And for how much? This is really the ultimate bottom line question. An honest "yes" or "no" shouldn't cost the "never going to happen" camp their integrity.

I'll have at it.

NO.

The transition from BB10 to Android is only about the 8th major change in operating systems that I've endured over the years.

As good as BB10 was, even if it was re-offered able to use Google Play Services, I would be VERY unlikely to go back, especially if the handset was going to cost me more than a similar Android one.

[Chuck Finley69]

I respectfully disagree. Unless something is factual and supported by direct evidence, then it's merely an opinion and should be stated as such.

If you haven't reviewed Blackberry's license personally, then your statements are by definition conjecture.

Stating them as anything more than personal opinion is just misleading.

Secondly, drawing a conclusion from a separate situation is certainly not a "smoking gun" or "legal precedent" as you state, because Blackberry has its own licensing agreement and terms. Nobody here knows what those terms are. We're all guessing. A conclusion simply cannot be drawn based on those facts. One can speculate, (as markmall has done in his own opinion), but there is no evidence to support a conclusion.

A simple conclusion is common sense. What's happened and been explained thoroughly is common sense. In some theoretical argumentative ivory tower dictates of what could or should happen, your points are technically valid. However, common sense dictates otherwise as we do not exist theoretically, lacking common sense.

[DonHB]

I respectfully disagree. Unless something is factual and supported by direct evidence, then it's merely an opinion and should be stated as such.

If you haven't reviewed Blackberry's license personally, then your statements are by definition conjecture.

Stating them as anything more than personal opinion is just misleading.

Secondly, drawing a conclusion from a separate situation is certainly not a "smoking gun" or "legal precedent" as you state, because Blackberry has its own licensing agreement and terms. Nobody here knows what those terms are. We're all guessing. A conclusion simply cannot be drawn based on those facts. One can speculate, (as markmall has done in his own opinion), but there is no evidence to support a conclusion.

Yay! You took the words right out of my mouth (and improved upon them).

[conite]

Yay! You took the words right out of my mouth (and improved upon them).

You can take a good look at a T-bone by sticking your head up a bull's a$$, but wouldn't you rather take the butcher's word for it?

[JSmith422]

We are discussing whether a company can have a Google-compliant product and a forked product at the same time. The legal precedent is pretty clear.

The last company that tried to circumvent it got hammered. And Google has become increasingly militant against fragmentation since then.

Your presumptive suggestion that BlackBerry somehow has a "better deal" than Acer is absurd.

My position stands. You can't even begin to discuss "legal precedent" without first knowing the terms of blackberry's agreement. Without knowing the terms of that agreement there is nothing to base any legal precedent on - whether for or against an android "fork." It's simply a nonsense argument...a four sided triangle, a round square. You're missing the most important part of legal precedent, you must have something to compare it against. Right now, that's an unknown quantity.

Further, I'm not presuming that Blackberry has a good deal or a bad deal....ONLY that a conclusion cannot be drawn based on a review of any other party's contract, or any so called legal precedent.

If you're renting a property from a landlord, do you bring your neighbor's lease to court to show the judge that your neighbor pays less in rent? And then expect the judge to say, "oh yes, he does pay less in rent, so therefore you should too."

It simply doesn't work like that. You bring your lease to court and your agreement is examined on its own merit. Then any dispute is resolved using an interpretation of the language contained in your lease - not your neighbors. Then a judge will look to how those specific terms contained in your lease (not different terms) have been previously ruled upon - legal precedent - to resolve the specific dispute.

You've drawn a conclusion that just isn't there.

[JSmith422]

You can take a good look at a T-bone by sticking your head up a bull's a$$, but wouldn't you rather take the butcher's word for it?

That's just it though.....you're not the butcher.

Side note: Great movie (and quote) by the way.

[conite]

My position stands. You can't even begin to discuss "legal precedent" without first knowing the terms of blackberry's agreement. Without knowing the terms of that agreement there is nothing to base any legal precedent on - whether for or against an android "fork." It's simply a nonsense argument...a four sided triangle, a round square. You're missing the most important part of legal precedent, you must have something to compare it against. Right now, that's an unknown quantity.

Further, I'm not presuming that Blackberry has a good deal or a bad deal....ONLY that a conclusion cannot be drawn based on a review of any other party's contract, or any so called legal precedent.

If you're renting a property from a landlord, do you bring your neighbor's lease to court to show the judge that your neighbor pays less in rent? And then expect the judge to say, "oh yes, he does pay less in rent, so therefore you should too."

It simply doesn't work like that. You bring your lease to court and your agreement is examined on its own merit. Then any dispute is resolved using an interpretation of the language contained in your lease - not your neighbors. Then a judge will look to how those specific terms contained in your lease (not different terms) have been previously ruled upon - legal precedent - to resolve the specific dispute.

You've drawn a conclusion that just isn't there.

So we can't ever discuss anything unless we have PERFECT information? Preponderance of the evidence, common sense, and logic is insufficient to come up with a reasonable determination for the sake of argument?

The other side of this debate has NONE of that.

[conite]

That's just it though.....you're not the butcher.

Side note: Great movie (and quote) by the way.

The butcher is the preponderance of the available evidence.

But yes, awesome movie.

[JSmith422]

So we can't ever discuss anything unless we have PERFECT information? Preponderance of the evidence, common sense, and logic is insufficient to come up with a reasonable determination for the sake of argument?

The other side of this debate has NONE of that.

Discussion, debate, and argument are one thing....stating opinion as hardcore fact is another thing entirely.

[JSmith422]

The butcher is the preponderance of the available evidence.

But yes, awesome movie.

The butcher, in this case, is Blackberry.

[conite]

Discussion, debate, and argument are one thing....stating opinion as hardcore fact is another thing entirely.

Just a degree of truthiness.

[DonHB]

So we can't ever discuss anything unless we have PERFECT information? Preponderance of the evidence, common sense, and logic is insufficient to come up with a reasonable determination for the sake of argument?

The other side of this debate has NONE of that.

This hasn't been a discussion and most would, likely, agree it failed as debate. Argument, absolutely.

[conite]

This hasn't been a discussion and most would, likely, agree it failed as debate. Argument, absolutely.

I would agree. You haven't come up with a single shred of evidence - perfect, imperfect, or otherwise.

Oh well, life goes on. Cheers.

[Invictus0]

Your presumptive suggestion that BlackBerry somehow has a "better deal" than Acer

Or Samsung,

https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/tec...33_223884.html

Edit: And this article suggesting multiple OEM's complained about a similar issue.

The European Commission has been investigating Android after rivals complained that Google has been abusing its market dominance. Google has been accused of limiting access to the Google Play Store unless phone makers also bundle Google search and Chrome apps. Google has also reportedly blocked phone makers from creating devices that run forked versions of Android, as part of an anti-fragmentation agreement.

https://www.theverge.com/2017/7/6/15...st-fine-rumors

[conite]

Or Samsung,

https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/tec...33_223884.html

Doesn't say "BlackBerry" in it, and isn't from this year. Lol.

Not notarized by Chen, and blessed by the Pope.

Meaningless.

[howarmat]

Let's assume BlackBerry does make an autoloader for the Motion with the Browser and libraries updated and other fixes to the OS would any of you buy it? And for how much? This is really the ultimate bottom line question. An honest "yes" or "no" shouldn't cost the "never going to happen" camp their integrity.

you would have to pay me to downgrade to something that bad and hinder my phone usage that badly.

[DonHB]

Doesn't say "BlackBerry" in it, and isn't from this year. Lol.

Not notarized by Chen, and blessed by the Pope.

Meaningless.

This is about an agreement from 2011 predating the case with Acer. The Korean FTC is considering reviewing a case from 2013. When would you say BlackBerry signed up for GPS/F?

But more importantly Google could be fined according to the second link which doesn't help your argument. Of course, it may be worth being fined again and continue the practice?

[conite]

This is about an agreement from 2011 predating the case with Acer. The Korean FTC is considering reviewing a case from 2013. When would you say BlackBerry signed up for GPS/F?

But more importantly Google could be fined according to the second link which doesn't help your argument. Of course, it may be worth being fined again and continue the practice?

Astonishing.

[DonHB]

This is about an agreement from 2011 predating the case with Acer. The Korean FTC is considering reviewing a case from 2013. When would you say BlackBerry signed up for GPS/F?

But more importantly Google could be fined according to the second link which doesn't help your argument. Of course, it may be worth being fined again and continue the practice?

Astonishing.

So, how does this suggest that BlackBerry could never have sufficient freedom to upgrade Android Player as you have been suggesting?

[conite]

So, how does this suggest that BlackBerry could never have sufficient freedom to upgrade Android Player as you have been suggesting?

I give up. You're incorrigible.

[DonHB]

I give up. You're incorrigible.

Thank you.

[Invictus0]

This is about an agreement from 2011 predating the case with Acer. The Korean FTC is considering reviewing a case from 2013. When would you say BlackBerry signed up for GPS/F?

But more importantly Google could be fined according to the second link which doesn't help your argument. Of course, it may be worth being fined again and continue the practice?

And the EU case? There are many examples and all are pointing in the same general direction.

All things considered, it makes sense. BlackBerry has been trying to license BB10 since at least 2012 and no one (not even a small OEM) has released a BB10 device. Yet despite this many OEM's have licensed Windows Phone, Sailfish, and Firefox OS in the same time period.

[DonHB]

And the EU case? There are many examples and all are pointing in the same general direction.

All things considered, it makes sense. BlackBerry has been trying to license BB10 since at least 2012 and no one (not even a small OEM) has released a BB10 device. Yet despite this many OEM's have licensed Windows Phone, Sailfish, and Firefox OS in the same time period.

If they chose the Android SDK with Flow as the UX perhaps there would have been more interest.

Even so, would you license a product from a company that had a questionable future and whose CEO was saying they would discontinue the product if sales were insufficient and there was no public statements regarding licensing being the ultimate goal and it would not compete with licensees?

An autoloader would not require investment in inventory and could add to sales of the Android licensees' product.

[Invictus0]

Would you license a product from a company that had a questionable future and whose CEO was saying they would discontinue the product if sales were insufficient?

That certainly wasn't the case in 2012 or most of 2013.

Jolla has had just as bad a time and that hasn't stopped OEM's and governments from using Sailfish OS.

Edit: Regarding your update, Heins was actually pretty public about licensing. I wouldn't be surprised if they had reached out to OEM's to gauge interest either.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolog...-platform.html

[DonHB]

That certainly wasn't the case in 2012 or most of 2013.

Jolla has had just as bad a time and that hasn't stopped OEM's and governments from using Sailfish OS.

Edit: Regarding your update, Heins was actually pretty public about licensing. I wouldn't be surprised if they had reached out to OEM's to gauge interest either.

BlackBerry: other manufacturers could license our new BB10 platform - Telegraph

The article begins:

The troubled technology giant cannot compete with larger manufacturers and so must look at how to get more budget smartphones into the market, Heins says.

Russia and which OEM's are preinstalling it?